Serious means impotent? You guys voted for brexit and that would put brexiters with the majority/centre. Plus this isn’t general election to the best of my understanding. Therefore, no need to appeal to leftists at all.
> You guys voted for brexit and that would put brexiters with the majority/centre.
The brexit vote passed with a very slim majority, which is why it's still controversial here.
It's also a cross spectrum issue, i.e. not of the left or the right.
Personally, I would like to see our politics become more centred and pragmatic again.
I don't want anyone like either Jeremy Corbyn or Jacob Rees-Mogg near the levers of power. Both seem determined to destroy things of value for the sake for the sake of the personal political dogmas.
If wokeness is the biggest problem a politician sees at the moment (which is the implication if that's the platform they're running on), then no - they are not serious.
Of cause wokeness is the biggest issue because it causes paralysis of governance. No one can get anything done when non-issues or issues with no solutions are prioritised
In context of the parent article, UK politics and the Tory party that's been in power for a while now: Would you say that "wokeness causing paralysis of governance" is their biggest problem to tackle right now?
Because, on the face of it, that viewpoint seems to be simply deranged.
Not being anti-woke does not make someone woke. There’s a whole bunch of people who think both sides range from silly to dangerous and would rather solve comparatively inconsequential issues like the economy/cost of life/global warming.
The principles are very serious; the implementation suffers from the usual risk of fighting a wrong in one direction with another wrong in the opposite direction.
I still think that woke is a lot better than not woke, although they sometimes would need a reality check, which ultimately would help a lot the cause.
