I was going to post this on another thread that was getting a tad distracted by it, but decided to open a new one instead.

Here's a little proposal.

How about we all stop using the names Conservatives/Tories and Labour to describe the two (main) political parties that have been in government in the UK over the last 34 years.

Reasons?

1) because we all know that the Parliamentary parties at least are nothing like they traditionally were and bear little relationship to the grassroots;

2) because, frankly, as has been explored here time and again (and generally agreed on both sides), both parties, when in government over the last 34 years, have pursued the same basic economic policies, which do not come from the traditional backgrounds and ideologies (for want of a better word) of either party. Those polices are neo-liberal ones;

3) because even bearing 1) and 2) in mind, the tribalism created by such party names gets in the way of more positive discussions.

So perhaps, because tags are useful, we should refer to them as Neo-Lib 1 and Neo-Lib 2 (purely on the basis of chronological order of governing with such an ideology).

What arises from that is a wider discussion:

a) can such parties be 'rescued' from the current state and returned to their respective, traditional values;

b) should they be 'rescued' from their current state;

c) if the answer to a) and b) is in the affirmative, then what should both learn from the last 34 years and dump/take forward, since it is impossible to return exactly to a past that is, say, pre-1979, not least in terms of changes to social attitudes;

d) if the answer to a) and b) is in the negative, then how do we move forward and, as has been touched on elsewhere, how do we engage the wider population in politics?

The tags are fine, we know to which parties they refer, even though the names are now less than accurate.
I seriously doubt the parties can be born again in their original images but I do still see a clear area of difference between Tory and Labour.
Basically, Labour nowadays thinks it can pursue a social democrat agenda via neolib economics, where the economy is for the good of the populace (and whilst I believe that capitalism can be harnessed for the public good, it needs reining back from where the Blair/Brown years let it get to) ... but the Conservatives still seek to enrich one stratum of society but nowadays without the paternalistic sense of duty that came with it in the old days.
As for the Liberals, their protest-party credentials are now shredded, whoever their new leader will be in 2015 (and they will have one), they will need to re-invent themselves to make clear who they are and what they stand for.

It's interesting watching parties such as the Pirate Party gain some ground on the Continent in various places.

Do you think such a think could take off over here? There is a UK Pirate Party already.

And what about parties that are already established such as the Greens?

The status quo of FPTP elections will ensure that, without a massive swing to the likes of the Greens and in concentrated areas, the effects will be limited to what the two major parties do policy-wise to prevent leakage of their own support to minor parties.
I.e. it depends on which of the main two parties leaks the most.

As Minty inferred , the grass roots support for both main parties is a million miles away from the views expressed in Westminster. At my local Labour party branch and CLP meetings shortly after the death of TBW the sentiments of my local councilors were in stark contrast to the "if you can't say anything nice say nothing at all" position taken by Ed Milliband. Personally I think Labour has moved too far away from its grassroots membership at national level. Indeed, my former (now retired) Labour MP said at a recent CLP meeting to our current incumbent Labour MP that now he was no longer on the front bench he no longer had to tow the party line.

A sign of how fscked the current political setup is: Labour MP on BBC London News having a pop at Boris because Boris Bikes are having to be partly funded by the public purse.

Partly funded? The majority of the funding is coming from TfL and all after Boris announced it would be funded (in total) by Barclays.

I'd be fooking mad too

Whilst there seems to be no appetite for this floated suggestion, in contrast in the crazy world of those goofy scientists, naming conventions are progressing. Of course, scientists have always had that peculiar, inimitable occasional totally dry humour, but a good example of the modern trends is the case of a 40-million year old extinct 6ft lizard. It has been named [iBarbaturex morrisoni[/i after after the late, great Doors singer Jim Morrison, who older readers may recall was known as The Lizard King, and a 6 foot lizard deffo fits that bill. Respect. www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-22764946

Whilst there seems to be no appetite for this floated suggestion, in contrast in the crazy world of those goofy scientists, naming conventions are progressing. Of course, scientists have always had that peculiar, inimitable occasional totally dry humour, but a good example of the modern trends is the case of a 40-million year old extinct 6ft lizard. It has been named [iBarbaturex morrisoni[/i after after the late, great Doors singer Jim Morrison, who older readers may recall was known as The Lizard King, and a 6 foot lizard deffo fits that bill. Respect. www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-22764946