More Sustainable Green Party Success after the 89’ Surge?

[Time Enough]

So fling this out to @Sideways and @Yokai Man as well as others, but how could you have more sustainable success for the Green Party after the 89’ surge?

I think one possibility is a possible Green-LibDem pact which I’ve mentioned before, this was mainly a standpoint taken by the Young Liberals Green Guard but David Owen is more successful, then Ashdown could go forward with it. Though also I know the party would still be in it’s ‘Green 2000’ chaos.

Another is Thatcher stays around in 1990 and the Greens become part of a protest vote against her by mainly Tory voters.

Any other scenarios or ideas, appreciated.

 

[Yokai Man]

Oof,that’s a hard one.

Unless Britain gets an AV or PR voting system then I don’t see it happening.

Maybe if a major environmental disaster or a massive corruption happened but beyond that and the examples you gave I can’t think of any way for that to happen in a FPTP voting system.

 

[Time Enough]

Oof,that’s a hard one.

Unless Britain gets an AV or PR voting system then I don’t see it happening.

Maybe if a major environmental disaster or a massive corruption happened but beyond that and the examples you gave I can’t think of any way for that to happen in a FPTP voting system.

I did forget to mention that I wasn’t looking for the Greens to gain like 20 seats, but more they gain a couple of seats are best and have the type of success on the local and assembly level as they do now, if that makes sense.

 

[Yokai Man]

I did forget to mention that I wasn’t looking for the Greens to gain like 20 seats, but more they gain a couple of seats are best and have the type of success on the local and assembly level as they do now, if that makes sense.

I could see that happening in a scenario where the SDP/Liberal Alliance wins in ‘84,but has to deal with a lot of problems and starts becoming unpopular.

However that doesn’t quite count as you specified after ‘89.

So yeah,I don’t really know.

This is more Sideways and Kato’s specialty if I may say so.

 

[Sideways]

So fling this out to @Sideways and @Yokai Man as well as others, but how could you have more sustainable success for the Green Party after the 89’ surge?

I think one possibility is a possible Green-LibDem pact which I’ve mentioned before, this was mainly a standpoint taken by the Young Liberals Green Guard but David Owen is more successful, then Ashdown could go forward with it. Though also I know the party would still be in it’s ‘Green 2000’ chaos.

Another is Thatcher stays around in 1990 and the Greens become part of a protest vote against her by mainly Tory voters.

Any other scenarios or ideas, appreciated.

A pact would be really bad for the Greens - the Plaid/Green deal is, in my opinion, a big reason why the Greens never built up any support in areas where the demographics favour them strongly.

Getting rid of Betty Shine so Icke doesn't meet her and begin his weird little path might help. It would ensure that the Greens aren't seen as so weird and might let them hold their vote up a little better in 1992. The other thing would be to have the SDP continue so you still have the SDP, Liberals, and Lib Dems still split the vote between themselves so the Greens seem like just another option among the three. They won't win but it may help.

Having the Scottish Greens not split will help in the long run as that could easily give you parliamentarians earlier in the Scottish Parliament.

Ooo - the ultimate thing you could do! Not have the Greens do so well in 1989! Maybe if the SDP had some luck and overtook the Lib Dems the Greens could have come a creditable but unremarkable 4th, the public would be less aware of their problems and by 1992 you have the SDP in terminal decline but the Lib Dems still much less powerful so the Greens are semi-respectable to liberal protest voters and get some decent results. From there they can build up candidate vetting processes and local campaigning and 1997 can be a decent springboard into PR based EU elections and winning seats in devolved government

 

[Time Enough]

Getting rid of Betty Shine so Icke doesn't meet her and begin his weird little path might help. It would ensure that the Greens aren't seen as so weird and might let them hold their vote up a little better in 1992. The other thing would be to have the SDP continue so you still have the SDP, Liberals, and Lib Dems still split the vote between themselves so the Greens seem like just another option among the three. They won't win but it may help.

Icke not going down his weird little path is certainly something I haven’t considered, I just kind of assumed Icke was always a bit off the end. But I know he was probably one of the more media friendly members so that helps.

Also I think the SDP existing means the Centrist Eurosceptic vote is split, though the Greens are certainly more distinctive and more like to gain votes from the shires.

Having the Scottish Greens not split will help in the long run as that could easily give you parliamentarians earlier in the Scottish Parliament.

Interesting, though I know the Scottish Greens have a Trotskyist element amongst them, which would probably hit a brick wall named Green 2000.

From there they can build up candidate vetting processes and local campaigning and 1997 can be a decent springboard into PR based EU elections and winning seats in devolved government

Ooooh, interesting. Which also means they would have a foot in the door as a possible Anti-Blair vote winner in the 00s, especially if the LibDems go with someone like Simon Hughes or Don Foster.

 

[Bolt451]

I was about to kick down the door with my big boot marked "electoral reform" then realised you said after the 89 surge. So no Alliance-in-83/84

wait. Electoral reform comes about following the 2010 election. Labour still go relatively to the centre, Green surge as a protest vote, especially if there was a swing from the Lib Dems too

That's technically after 1989

but not what you were looking for, no.

 

[Time Enough]

wait. Electoral reform comes about following the 2010 election. Labour still go relatively to the centre, Green surge as a protest vote, especially if there was a swing from the Lib Dems too

That's technically after 1989

but not what you were looking for, no.

*cough* Lab-Lib Dem coalition 92’ *cough*

 

[Bolt451]

*cough* Lab-Lib Dem coalition 92’ *cough*

ohdang.gif

 

[Sideways]

Interesting, though I know the Scottish Greens have a Trotskyist element amongst them, which would probably hit a brick wall named Green 2000.

I don't think the Green Party constitution allows for very hard brick walls, Green 2000 achieved alot of their internal goals but at the cost of their political capitol within the party. Had the Scottish Greens stayed in they'd be able to enact a lot of the same policies. I must admit the Scottish Greens aren't a specialism of mine.

Icke not going down his weird little path is certainly something I haven’t considered, I just kind of assumed Icke was always a bit off the end. But I know he was probably one of the more media friendly members so that helps.

It depends on your view of Human nature, right? Had Icke not had the specific transformative experiences he had, would he have found others and been as weird? Even if he could delay going weird and turquoise for a year, that would help dissociate him from the Greens. Or if he got less weird - found something a little less ostentatious

 

[Time Enough]

I don't think the Green Party constitution allows for very hard brick walls, Green 2000 achieved alot of their internal goals but at the cost of their political capitol within the party. Had the Scottish Greens stayed in they'd be able to enact a lot of the same policies. I must admit the Scottish Greens aren't a specialism of mine.

Ah that’s alright, though I get the sense that the Scottish Greens will probably start demanding more autonomy way from the GPEW if they make gains and the GPEW doesn’t.

It depends on your view of Human nature, right? Had Icke not had the specific transformative experiences he had, would he have found others and been as weird? Even if he could delay going weird and turquoise for a year, that would help dissociate him from the Greens. Or if he got less weird - found something a little less ostentatious

I was just thinking, say Icke doesn’t meet Shine, goes to Therapy and gets ‘better’ before rejoining the Greens and becoming a Horizon presenter or something and becoming incredibly popular in the 2000s.

You could see the Green Party become a bit like the Liberals in the 60s and 70s with Icke supporters and Non-Icke supporters who think this whole, emerging cult of personality is a bit weird.

Oh no, I’ve just found a way to have David Icke become the Greens Jeremy Thorpe.

ohdang.gif

Electoral Reform occurring under a Lab-Lib Dem coalition feels like the best possibility outside of Tony Blair agreeing with Roy Jenkins *dry wheeze*.

 

[Charles EP M.]

Greens displacing the Lib Dems as the third-party "pox on your houses" vote - especially if Iraq still happens - and getting devolved seats is going to have some fun outcomes if a version of 2010 shows up. Will this Green Party go into coalition with Cameron or go with Brown? If the latter (having disrguntled conservatives and Alt!Cameron still going "I'm a nice liberal honest"), what are they going to want out of the coalition? Wind turbines are going to be a bigger point of contention if they're symbolic to Tories of The Other Guys.

Oh no, I’ve just found a way to have David Icke become the Greens Jeremy Thorpe.

An alleged hitman kills someone's pet lizard.

 

[Sideways]

You could see the Green Party become a bit like the Liberals in the 60s and 70s with Icke supporters and Non-Icke supporters who think this whole, emerging cult of personality is a bit weird.

Oh no, I’ve just found a way to have David Icke become the Greens Jeremy Thorpe.

If you go down that road an interesting side effect is that Caroline Lucas will likely remain loyal to Parkin, then Lambert. Which would see her occupying whatever ideological space Icke isn't in. That could be nearly any space, though

 

[Time Enough]

Greens displacing the Lib Dems as the third-party "pox on your houses" vote - especially if Iraq still happens - and getting devolved seats is going to have some fun outcomes if a version of 2010 shows up. Will this Green Party go into coalition with Cameron or go with Brown? If the latter (having disrguntled conservatives and Alt!Cameron still going "I'm a nice liberal honest"), what are they going to want out of the coalition? Wind turbines are going to be a bigger point of contention if they're symbolic to Tories of The Other Guys.

Another addition is if the Greens position themselves as the Big Tent Anti-Establishment voice, and gain results you could get defectors from the Labour Left and even the occasional random Tory (Laura Sandys or Peter Ainsworth etc.)

You could see a scenario where the party splits over joining a coalition or not and we get a Conservative-Green-DUP coalition or something as cursed.

If you go down that road an interesting side effect is that Caroline Lucas will likely remain loyal to Parkin, then Lambert. Which would see her occupying whatever ideological space Icke isn't in. That could be nearly any space, though

Lucas as the Steel to Icke’s Thorpe. Something that could happen is if the Greens make gains in per say the 00’s and the eventual Tory or Labour coalition possibility occurs, you could see Lucas lead a group in splitting off from any Tory coalition deal etc.

...

I should make this into a list.

 

[Sideways]

Lucas as the Steel to Icke’s Thorpe. Something that could happen is if the Greens make gains in per say the 00’s and the eventual Tory or Labour coalition possibility occurs, you could see Lucas lead a group in splitting off from any Tory coalition deal etc.

...

I should make this into a list.

I think that may be the wrong say round, tbh.

Lucas is not a radical, in the same way that Icke is a radical. Icke will appear on TV in turquoise and declare himself the son of God, Lucas has spent a career trying to get Green party candidates to wear ties. If anything, a leader in the vein of Lambert, Lucas, Kitkat, or such would welcome a coalition as a way to make changes, while the Icke tendency would reject it.

Honestly, I think Icke may be happiest as *not* the leader, for one thing, the position didn't exist until the 2000s and I doubt he'd establish it, for another, the Greens have short terms so he'd never be able to implement his changes. But being a powerful king across the water lets you influence things without having to step down or explain decisions the party made you may disagree with.

I struggle to know if the Greens could work with the Tories - so much of their right is tied in with population matters and other bad ideas that you kind of have to jetison before the press catch wind of it. Maybe a very left wing conservative party and a very right wing green party

 

[Time Enough]

I think that may be the wrong say round, tbh.

Lucas is not a radical, in the same way that Icke is a radical. Icke will appear on TV in turquoise and declare himself the son of God, Lucas has spent a career trying to get Green party candidates to wear ties. If anything, a leader in the vein of Lambert, Lucas, Kitkat, or such would welcome a coalition as a way to make changes, while the Icke tendency would reject it.

Ah, oh well, still an idea. But yeah, I could see Lucas being the one to get the Greens into a coalition with Labour or something.

I struggle to know if the Greens could work with the Tories - so much of their right is tied in with population matters and other bad ideas that you kind of have to jetison before the press catch wind of it. Maybe a very left wing conservative party and a very right wing green party

A Peter Ainsworth Tories and a Ted Goldsmith Greens would help, but that's before the POD I mentioned. Oh well.

 

[Sideways]

A Peter Ainsworth Tories and a Ted Goldsmith Greens would help, but that's before the POD I mentioned. Oh well.

I don't think that's *necessarily* a problem. The Party still had Porritt and Parkin as active members in 1989. If the 1989 result puts a little less attention on them maybe the coalition holds up and Lucas represents the genteel centre left wing of the party come coalition time. She did get her start working with them. The big problem is, a lot of the members are to the left of those middle party types.

 

[Techdread]

Out of curiosity, and not wishing to derail Time Enough's thread, but how would one categories the various wing & groupings within the Green Party at this point? I was given to understand, if nothing else, that the splitting of the Greens into England & Wales, Scottish Greens, and Northern Ireland was a relatively amicable affair by all accounts.

 

[Sideways]

Out of curiosity, and not wishing to derail Time Enough's thread, but how would one categories the various wing & groupings within the Green Party at this point? I was given to understand, if nothing else, that the splitting of the Greens into England & Wales, Scottish Greens, and Northern Ireland was a relatively amicable affair by all accounts.

I guess the thing is, it was an amicable affair that happened at a time when there was intense internal conflicts about the shape the party should take. Derek Walls account puts it as a conflict between centre left centralisers and hard leftists who wanted more diffuse power structures but given the party shifted left after Green 2000 and the internal politics of the party don't seem that clear cut now I wonder if his book on the matter is 100% accurate