Talk:Loyal opposition

The article presently reads: the leader of the largest minority party in Parliament is termed "The Leader of Her Majesty's Loyal Opposition". I am changing this text, as the present leader of the largest minority party in Canada's present Parliament happens to be termed "The Prime Minister of Canada". 216.126.78.119 12:44, 17 Apr 2005 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Loyal opposition. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090327044410/http://www.parliament.uk/commons/lib/research/notes/snpc-03910.pdf to http://www.parliament.uk/commons/lib/research/notes/snpc-03910.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 01:10, 27 May 2017 (UTC)

Does the EU follow this principle?
We all know who leads the EU. But where is its 'loyal opposition'? Crawiki (talk) 16:26, 29 March 2019 (UTC)

Loyal opposition in a non-UK/Commonwealth context
In a non-UK/Commonwealth context, "Loyal opposition" typically stands for an ostensive opposition party in an authoritarian regime which is actually a satellite of the ruling party, such as the MDB under the Brazilian military regime or the Liberal Democratic Party of Russia. Glide08 (talk) 13:13, 23 February 2022 (UTC)


 * And I see that you went ahead and added a section to that effect. Unfortunately, you didn't add a single source - not even an example of its use in that sense. I can't think of a sensible way of searching for it that will include only the relevant uses: perhaps you have some real examples (or, even better, can point to a discussion of the phrase in that sense, since Wikipedia has a strong preference for secondary sources)? If so, please add some. ColinFine (talk) 21:42, 31 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Not only are these no sources, but this confuses distinct concepts. The article is about the concept, not the words-as-words; the additions are off-topic and make the lead unintelligible. I've reverted to what I believe is the "last good version". Also removing the globalize tag, because if the concept is UK-related, there's no way to "globalize" except by adding original research. DFlhb (talk) 16:51, 19 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Helms, L. (2023). Political Oppositions in Democratic and Authoritarian Regimes: A State-of-the-Field(s) Review. Government and Opposition, 58(2), 391-414. doi:10.1017/gov.2022.25: "What is more, opposition parties can stabilize an established authoritarian regime even further. This is especially the case when a regime manages to co-opt some opposition parties into the regime, creating a ‘loyal opposition’ and thus a division between ‘insiders’ and ‘outsiders’. This phenomenon has been widespread, including regimes as different as Botswana, Egypt or Russia."
 * Egyptian President Calls for Stronger Political Life (Voice of America News Article): "Michele Dunne, director of the Middle East Program at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace in Washington, said the situation does not allow for the emergence of real political parties that could move Egypt closer to democracy. “What is going on in Egypt reminds me of the 1970s, under the late President [Anwar] Sadat, who sort of arranged the political scene and formed a centrist ruling party and a couple of loyal opposition parties to the right and to the left,” Dunne said. “And I think with the possibility of forming a party that would support President Sissi and then letting the historic Wafd Party head a loyal opposition bloc is the same top-down politics, rather than bottom-up politics.”"
 * Metz, H. C. & Library Of Congress. Federal Research Division. (1996) . Washington, D.C.: Federal Research Division, Library of Congress: For sale by the Supt. of Docs., U.S. G.P.O.: "Prior to 1950, the Republic of Turkey was essentially a one-party state ruled by the Republican People's Party, which had been created by Atatürk to implement the Six Arrows of Kemalism. Although there had been abortive experiments with "loyal opposition" parties in the mid-1920s and in 1930, it was not until 1946 that the CHP permitted political parties to form and contest elections, albeit in a politically controlled environment."
 * Glide08 (talk) 08:03, 20 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Do these sources not use the same words to mean something different? They use the term colloquially and literally (fake opposition that is loyal to what it claims to oppose), while this article is about parties that disagree with the government but don't want to overthrow the whole system. It seems very roughly similar to Brandmauer/Ausgrenzung in Germany, or Front républicain in France. Homographs belong in separate articles, see WP:NOTDICT. If you create a new article for the meaning related to authoritarian regimes, keep in mind that sources should discuss the term as a concept, not merely use the term in passing. DFlhb (talk) 08:56, 20 July 2023 (UTC)