I am pretty sure that even the college grads cants say opposition party for Labour party and electing prime minister with out even elections sounds like dictatorship to me and forcing people to be behave well in public areas by shouting at them in microphones. IS this good for ppl of engnland
Copyright © 2024 Q2A.MX - All rights reserved.
Answers & Comments
Verified answer
In England, as in all Westminster parliamentary democracies, people do not vote for the Prime Minister. They vote for their local member of parliament- who are usually a member of one party or another (the party with the most representatives in the lower house is the government). Each party is responsible for deciding who their leader is.
When Tony Blair stood down as Prime Minister, it was normal practise for the Labour Party to choose his replacement as leader. As for the people who voted for him (his constituents) they have the opportunity to vote for a replacement at a by-election. I might also add that prior to the last general election, Tony Blair announced his intention to stand down during the current term(which he was under no obligation to do).
As for the rest of your question- I think you may need to re- word it or something because it isn't clear what you want to say(ask).
While not from England, and frankly not understanding all of your question, which seems to deal with a Prime Minister coming into power without elections, I have no idea if that's the situaion you're having with this current government. Though I've been very busy in last few months and not too attentive to world news, I think Tony Blair had left office early to have someone else from his party elected. Something similar to Israel?
While not really informed as to this, I must disagree with you that England is a dictatorship if they are enforcing behavior in public areas by using microphones, since unless everything there has changed in these few months, I clearly recall seeing thousands of Muslims rally in many instances, and not being stopped by anyone. There was even an alledged terror-provoking leader among them, whom was later accused of inciting the crowds.
Sounds more like a semi-aggressive form of socialism to me. Whoever said that he'll believe it's a dictatorship when they start shooting people for the same thing is dead-on.
when the government starts shooting people who say negative things then i'll believe this is a dictatorship