Do we really want WOL to be used as a platform for a particular political viewpoint reproduced ad nauseum?

Hi Reggie's.
I believe that on a site such as this we should all aspire to the heights of literary excellence, and of academic freedom of speech...each according to their respective inclinations and abilities.

In that spirit therefore, without wishing to unduly lecture you, may I offer a little friendly advice...It's been sixty-odd years since I first approached this subject, but if my memory serves me well, the correct form of the noun when preceded by "ad" is, I believe, "nauseam".
😉

I’d like to wear two hats in this discussion. Firstly, poetry is a magnificent medium for expressing a particular political viewpoint, witnessed by reading some of our masters Leonard and his Bobness.
However, (different hat sliding on here) instead of members reading a politically charged poem and commenting on its content they incessantly rally for or against the view of the writer.
True, some on here are more than happy (indeed relish) scratching scabs for entertainment with those taking a different view providing the metaphorical audience.
To many though political WOL tubthumping is just a bloody great yawn and can easily be avoided by blocking certain members (the most regular regular voices) from their feed.
Sadly something I cannot do!

I think the problem, Reggie old mate, is that Write Out Loud is used to project two particular political viewpoints, not one. The two are diametrically opposed to each other. This has been the case in the UK since 2016. Write Out Loud is quite a global site these days, judging from the figures. I suppose other poets from the rest of the world - which is quite a big place - are bored by or simply ignore our parochial concerns.

"...a particular political viewpoint."

or "all" political viewpoints?

I'm prepared to compromise: I think that in the interests of peace and goodwill to all we should ban all mention of politics and all reference to political parties.

Can't see any problem there!

Political poems are always good outlets for making a topical point as long they remain free from what has been referred to
as "rant". That comes too close to "boring" - which happens to
rhyme with "snoring".

MC.
Reggie's question wasn't asking whether poor quality poems (according to whose judgement?) should be banned.

He was (effectively) asking:
should "...a particular political viewpoint" be banned

which is a completely different question;

one which prompts me to ask in return:

"...is UK society sleepwalking into a totalitarian, fascistic mentality?"

I did not mention banning. The purpose of the post was to try to encourage members to rein it in a bit...or a lot in the case of one particular member.

And thanks Ullium for pointing out my spelling error in an open forum. I shall have to live with the shame.

RG - know the feeling, not least when my keyboard fingering
strays on to an adjoining key in error to produce a mistake not
spotted at the time. But as long as we are understood, eh? 😉
UOC - less is more is some respects, certainly when approaching a political
topic. I can't speak for others but I tend to switch off if the point (hopefully with
some wit included) isn't made in the first half dozen lines. If boring rhymes with
snoring, then rant goes with cant.

I'm happy to write 'political', but I accept it's got to work harder to get way above boring, or no one will read, like or comment.

The challenge is to get beyond rant and be funny, clever, insightful, human. All the things we expect of any poem really.

I can only recall one particular instance when I was prompted to write impartially and politically during a workshop at Ars Poetica and came up with the following:

The Fate of State

These our minions of the state
Standing long in poor debate
In a game of give and take
Oft in time procrastinate
Caring naught for pity’s sake
Tending to infuriate
In the cause of love and hate
Passing bills to recreate;
The same old problems yet again!

This my friend do not mistake
Human beings are merely freight
To the Greatest Apostate
Living large in his estate
Who transforms their love to hate
There his greed to satiate
And his ministers placate
So that they associate;
Their constant failure with success!

See the Lords there imitate
Nothing new and far too late
With their verbose masturbate
And their falsehood and their hate
Or their porn stars defoliate
Our common sense propitiate
Through the drawn-out media debate
So that we accumulate;
A permanent sense of apathy!

Not the masters of our fate
Just the slaves of Queen and state
Who are apt to obfuscate
And on greed attend and wait
So consumers take the bait
Thereby to perpetuate
From the cause originate
Nothing new and far too late;
One more illusion of the Truth!

See how they appropriate
Land and sea and sky my mate!
There’s nothing left for us to take
Shackled to the working stake
Freedom we might merely fake
And their liberties inflate
Truth and falsehood to conflate
In this parody of state-
We’re merely automatons!

So I’ll not here deliberate
Any further on our fate
‘Cus it’s certainly too late
In this perennial debate
To change the weakness of the state
Or thereby elucidate;
What they say is their mistake
What they mean to orchestrate
Is chaos and disorder!

It was criticised on the basis of its singular rhyming scheme...which though in some respects merely a ballad or rant!

This discussion has got me thinking as I wrote this piece: https://www.writeoutloud.net/public/blogentry.php?blogentryid=130997

Perhaps political, but not party political and I hope an amusing take on the idea.

Leonidas -
I enjoyed the grasp of language and its use in rhyme. Both
demanding in their own right.

Yes we do!
All viewpoints.