Read on Twitter
What's in a name?
And more importantly, when is an Alliance not an Alliance?
A random threaded thought, with specific reference to an Alliance that considers itself LGB in name, if not necessarily in nature...
And more importantly, when is an Alliance not an Alliance?
A random threaded thought, with specific reference to an Alliance that considers itself LGB in name, if not necessarily in nature...
Many big campaigning organisations - Stonewall, Amnesty, Cats Protection, Shelter - opt for names that in one way or another allude to what it is they do.
You can intuit much about the organisation and, crucially, its supporters, from their name...
You can intuit much about the organisation and, crucially, its supporters, from their name...
Contrariwise, UK politics has an Alliance trend.
To begin, there's the Countryside Alliance, claimed as a British organisation promoting issues relating to the countryside such as farming, rural services, small businesses and field sports, aiming to "Give Rural Britain a voice".
To begin, there's the Countryside Alliance, claimed as a British organisation promoting issues relating to the countryside such as farming, rural services, small businesses and field sports, aiming to "Give Rural Britain a voice".
Doncha just love the rhetoric there?
Let's "give rural Britain a voice"...which sorta assumes that no-one else is standing up for rural Britain....or that this particular Alliance represents more than the interest of a self-selected privileged elite...
Let's "give rural Britain a voice"...which sorta assumes that no-one else is standing up for rural Britain....or that this particular Alliance represents more than the interest of a self-selected privileged elite...
To be fair, the CA claims about 100,000 supporters. Or members. Not entirely clear which.
Then there's the Taxpayers Alliance. This, depending on pov, is a grassroots campaign for lower taxes, government transparency and an end to wasteful government spending.
Or a right-wing pressure group with 3,000 supporters donating an average of c.£300 per person.
Or a right-wing pressure group with 3,000 supporters donating an average of c.£300 per person.
Or maybe a much smaller number of big privileged donors? Who knows. Because they "respect" the privacy of donors, which means they are not saying.
Note, again, how the word "Alliance" is used to imply a level of collegiality and inclusivity that probably is not true.
Note, again, how the word "Alliance" is used to imply a level of collegiality and inclusivity that probably is not true.
And last and likely least of the three is the LGB Alliance. Surely they would not be using the "Alliance" label to promote themselves as having more support than they have?
Surely they are not about pushing a very narrow, privileged agenda at the expense of other LGBT folks?
Surely they are not about pushing a very narrow, privileged agenda at the expense of other LGBT folks?
I could not possibly say.
I merely observe that Alliances, when it comes to pressure groups, do seem to share certain characteristics...and i leave it to others to decide which ones the LGB lot share with the Countryside and Taxpayers ones.
I merely observe that Alliances, when it comes to pressure groups, do seem to share certain characteristics...and i leave it to others to decide which ones the LGB lot share with the Countryside and Taxpayers ones.
To be fair, i would believe much of the LGB Alliance...but have yet to see evidence of them being cruel to foxes. Who knows...
That is all.
/fin
That is all.
/fin
