So we're to have no taxation of the rich, production of armaments instead of useful consumer goods, no employment rights or environmental protection, and weapons sales to any despot with the money to buy them. And you "hate" Corbyn and Foot. Let me ask, are you in favour of Brexit too?
-
Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more
Corbyn's days (very) numbered?
- Thread starter GlennB
- Start date
Since you clearly aren't reading what I'm posting I see no point in responding any further.
On further consideration to eliminate your ridiculous strawmen:
Tax the rich more-Yes, but it as Aber pointed out it won't solve the problem
Production of armaments-Yes it isn't an either or.
Never mentioned employment rights or the environment but I am all favour of strengthening them
Weapon sales to despots-again never mentioned it but a definite no
Foot, more sadness than anything, he was a decent man completely unsuited to the job of leading the party.
Corbyn, I despise the man for his hypocrisy, he demands loyalty he was never willing to give when he was on the backbenches. He is going to cost Labour the next election.
Last edited:
I really don't think that's what you believe. I think that this is what you believe.
And now your telling me what I think, and we're done.
To be clear, you are now the sole person on my ignore list.
Last edited:
Jules Galen
Banned
- Joined
- Jun 17, 2013
- Messages
- 3,726
Hey...I'm an American and no nothing about UK politics, but I wasn't born yesterday. If Corbyn had nothing but a "Narrow Base", then the UK Rags wouldn't give so much print.
Get real!
Firstly he is the leader of one of the two main parties and the Labour conference is on, of course they are covering him. Secondly the UK rags are almost all Tory leaning, they love Corbyn because he's so easy to attack. Seriously I lived through the 80s I saw the Labour party damn nearly destroyed and I can see all the same mistakes made then being made now. Now if not wishing to see the party spend another 18 years in the wilderness makes me some sort of neo-fascist, well so be it.
Jules Galen
Banned
- Joined
- Jun 17, 2013
- Messages
- 3,726
#1 All rags lean to the right...even if they are in America and support Hillary Clinton (and she's a Right-Winger have no doubt)
#2 If Labor blows up, then so be it (although I think it would be sad). But...let's at least keep facts straight.
#3 Nope. I just addressed the facts. Or...what had to be the facts given Corbyn's slamming in the media.
Noztradamus
Illuminator
- Joined
- Jan 17, 2010
- Messages
- 4,680
"History repeats itself, first as tragedy, second as farce." - Karl Marx
A good farce will always get attention
How many ?
The people interviewed on the streets in Sunderland and Lincolnshire were quite clear that it was all about immigration, it wasn't a generic anti-establishment vote. I'm also not clear why the Scottish anti-establishment vote results in a diametrically opposed result than in the rest of the UK
I suppose it comes down to how effectively you can represent a group if you're never in government and don't present an effective opposition either.
If the Corbyn Labour Party (CLP) ends up very accurately representing the interests of a couple of million people across two or three hundred constituencies it runs the risk of becoming electorally irrelevant. It may end up with a handful of MPs being returned from the (post-)industrial heartlands but it will never manage to gain the 300+ MPs required to form a government or even the 200+ MPs needed to be the senior partner in a coalition. It also runs the risk of not having enough coalition partners. Sure the SNP and the CLP may find common ground (but if the CLP is a unionist party I can see trouble ahead and if it is not, it's something else to add to its electoral headwinds in England) but a CLP will be too left wing for the LibDems, Conservatives, UKIP or whatever to form a government.
A split in the Labour Party into the CLP and New Labour Party (NLP) will likely be even more damaging to both. In many constituencies it will likely split the Labour vote letting the Conservatives, LibDems or UKIP in. Unless of course the CLP and NLP manage to arrange some kind of electoral pact.
If Labour is targeting the disenchanted protest vote then that's a big risk that they're taking not least because "the disenchanted" covers an immense range from Anarchists like Caveman1917 who want to rip up the whole system and start again through to those people in Sunderland and Lincolnshire who want those brown faces and strange Eastern European accents off the streets and on their way back to where they came from.
Any party can only appeal to one part of that spectrum and to do that while ignoring the 50%, 60%, 70%, 80%, 90% who are generally content with the status quo is a risky policy.
Not necessarily. The EDL and "engaged" in putting bricks through windows and setting fire to mosques. Corbyn's speech yesterday was fine in terms of aspiration but we'll need to see whether he can actually develop a coherent (and affordable and sellable) manifesto to make it happen and more importantly, to put pressure on the current government. At the moment it's all unicorns and moonbeams.
His performance as leader of the opposition has however been very poor indeed. Theresa May, who by rights should be quaking in her kitten heels given the splits in her party and her tiny majority has been able to govern with impunity because Corbyn is such a poor performer at the dispatch box and has failed to generate any momentum beyond the 350,000 ardent supporters who saw him returned to the Labour leadership.
Who's advocating that ?
It shows what you can do with a charismatic leader even if you have **** policies. Labour have a real chance of developing some good policies (if they's allow themselves not to go back to Clause 4) but at the moment they have no way of selling them.
From my perspective there are two strikes against Corbyn. The fact that he is a 70's throwback politically and that he is totally ineffective as an opposition leader (in terms of unifying his party and MPs, holding the government to account and selling the Labour message to the wider UK population). The former wouldn't be such an issue if the latter were taken care of - but there we are
If people are expecting their lives to be immediately transformed they need to grow up.
Between 1997 and 2010, New Labour achieved a great deal IMO to try and address the growing inequalities in UK society. Perhaps it wasn't enough for some who wanted to "eat the rich" but the investment in the NHS*, investment in social services and so on managed to reverse the effects of the previous Conservative governments.
* - Though I'll never forgive them for all those terrible PFI deals to keep borrowing off the books
Oh no, I will most assuredly vote even if I have to spoil my ballot.
Archie Gemmill Goal
Banned
- Joined
- Nov 18, 2015
- Messages
- 8,324
You can't 'cost' someone something they never had and never would have had.
The alternatives to Corbyn are just as bad or worse. Labour aren't winning the next election no matter who is in charge. They are a shambles and have been for sometime.
Remember they carved their own gravestone at one point and then decided to go to Greggs for lunch?
The key difference in Scotland is that people have free prescriptions, free elderly care, free higher education, free bus travel for the elderly and disabled, more say in the Scottish Parliament, access to grants and loans to small businesses, access to good quality social housing, a belief in green technology, clear ways to communicate with politicians, and about 200 different policies that affect people in different ways in their daily life. It is not perfect but it is a country that wants to improve the quality of life for all its citizens whether they are born in Scotland or immigrants.
It is still a country where community activism is important and used to good effect. Most Scots left the Labour party because of the New Labour project or because of the Iraq war. We are still to some extent an old Labour place and the SNP have been good at formulating policy in those terms.
The politics in Scotland are left of centre no matter what party.
They were also clearer about Brexit because all parties in Scotland say that immigration is a positive thing due to skill shortages and a rapidly ageing demographic and that membership of the EU brings more benefits than it costs. I think many people in Scotland now have a mistrust of the press rather than politicians.
Last edited:
Which will simply guarantee the Tories win.
We do not have a voting system whereby a splintered left (or right) can form a government. The opportunity for dealing with that issue was missed 5 years ago.
Do you have a solution? Or don't you think a solution is necessary?
A hardish socialist party will never be elected in the UK. A softish one, like Australia's Labor, can and do regularly get elected.
Corbyn will only lead the former. He will leave the party either destroyed or split, and glorifying his righteousness. Scum.
Archie Gemmill Goal
Banned
- Joined
- Nov 18, 2015
- Messages
- 8,324
How many ?
The people interviewed on the streets in Sunderland and Lincolnshire were quite clear that it was all about immigration, it wasn't a generic anti-establishment vote. I'm also not clear why the Scottish anti-establishment vote results in a diametrically opposed result than in the rest of the UK
I suppose it comes down to how effectively you can represent a group if you're never in government and don't present an effective opposition either.
If the Corbyn Labour Party (CLP) ends up very accurately representing the interests of a couple of million people across two or three hundred constituencies it runs the risk of becoming electorally irrelevant. It may end up with a handful of MPs being returned from the (post-)industrial heartlands but it will never manage to gain the 300+ MPs required to form a government or even the 200+ MPs needed to be the senior partner in a coalition. It also runs the risk of not having enough coalition partners. Sure the SNP and the CLP may find common ground (but if the CLP is a unionist party I can see trouble ahead and if it is not, it's something else to add to its electoral headwinds in England) but a CLP will be too left wing for the LibDems, Conservatives, UKIP or whatever to form a government.
A split in the Labour Party into the CLP and New Labour Party (NLP) will likely be even more damaging to both. In many constituencies it will likely split the Labour vote letting the Conservatives, LibDems or UKIP in. Unless of course the CLP and NLP manage to arrange some kind of electoral pact.
If Labour is targeting the disenchanted protest vote then that's a big risk that they're taking not least because "the disenchanted" covers an immense range from Anarchists like Caveman1917 who want to rip up the whole system and start again through to those people in Sunderland and Lincolnshire who want those brown faces and strange Eastern European accents off the streets and on their way back to where they came from.
Any party can only appeal to one part of that spectrum and to do that while ignoring the 50%, 60%, 70%, 80%, 90% who are generally content with the status quo is a risky policy.
Not necessarily. The EDL and "engaged" in putting bricks through windows and setting fire to mosques. Corbyn's speech yesterday was fine in terms of aspiration but we'll need to see whether he can actually develop a coherent (and affordable and sellable) manifesto to make it happen and more importantly, to put pressure on the current government. At the moment it's all unicorns and moonbeams.
His performance as leader of the opposition has however been very poor indeed. Theresa May, who by rights should be quaking in her kitten heels given the splits in her party and her tiny majority has been able to govern with impunity because Corbyn is such a poor performer at the dispatch box and has failed to generate any momentum beyond the 350,000 ardent supporters who saw him returned to the Labour leadership.
Who's advocating that ?
It shows what you can do with a charismatic leader even if you have **** policies. Labour have a real chance of developing some good policies (if they's allow themselves not to go back to Clause 4) but at the moment they have no way of selling them.
From my perspective there are two strikes against Corbyn. The fact that he is a 70's throwback politically and that he is totally ineffective as an opposition leader (in terms of unifying his party and MPs, holding the government to account and selling the Labour message to the wider UK population). The former wouldn't be such an issue if the latter were taken care of - but there we are
If people are expecting their lives to be immediately transformed they need to grow up.
Between 1997 and 2010, New Labour achieved a great deal IMO to try and address the growing inequalities in UK society. Perhaps it wasn't enough for some who wanted to "eat the rich" but the investment in the NHS*, investment in social services and so on managed to reverse the effects of the previous Conservative governments.
* - Though I'll never forgive them for all those terrible PFI deals to keep borrowing off the books
Oh no, I will most assuredly vote even if I have to spoil my ballot.
You make good points but I still think there is something more fundamental that you are missing.
The SNP are an outlet for a protest vote in Scotland because they can stick it to the Tories and Westminster and offer a radical change in independence. They've found a position that works and that seems to resonate. But I'm almost convinced they could have put together a left-leaning case for being out of the EU and the result would have reversed.
Part of the narrative in Scotland was that if we vote In and England votes Out we create a constitutional stooshie for DC and Gideon and if we vote In and England votes In then we get to see Farage and Bojo greeting. Win-Win.
In the absence of a coherent left-leaning message in England then we see people looking in the wrong places for alternatives. Hence UKIP. Hence Brexit. The only voices offering to change things and give two fingers to the comfortable well-off establishment toffs in Westminster are on the right.
Lots of people feel powerless, disenfranchised and disconnected from mainstream politics and will express their anger in whatever way they can. Voting for Corbyn is just another way of doing that. They are tired of slick suits, PR men and Oxbridge toffs pretending that they understand them and have their interests at heart. And they have no sense that voting will make things better. No genuine alternatives.
I'm not sure if they are naive enough to think that Corbyn can become PM or perhaps they'd just rather have their man leading with no power than someone else's man leading and ignoring them.
Oh and spoiling your ballot IS not voting. For someone who seems to be arguing a pragmatic 'least bad option' for Labour it's kind of ironic that you value a futile protest like that. Could you see there might be parallels between that and voting Corbyn? Consider putting Corbyn in charge a giant spoiled ballot by those hundreds of thousands of people and see if it changes your perspective.
Archie Gemmill Goal
Banned
- Joined
- Nov 18, 2015
- Messages
- 8,324
The Tories are going to win anyway. I think that should be the starting point when deciding what the best strategy should be. Forget the next election. Maybe even the one after that.
Incidentally there is a 'splintered' left in Scotland. But the SNP have won pretty much every seat. Now I'm sure the SNP would be happy to join a left-leaning coalition with Labour in Westminster. Is it really beyond hope to think that a middle-left and a centre party can co-exist in England and Wales?
When was the last time the UK elected any left-leaning party? Certainly well before I was taking any interest in politics.
The venom aimed at Corbyn is ridiculous. Who is it that led to the party being destroyed and split? Blair, Brown, Milliband are as much if not more to blame than Corbyn.
The solution if there is one is for Labour to discover or re-discover its values and start winning over the electorate to their point of view. To find a credible position that differentiates itself from a centre-right establishment party in the eyes of the electorate (not purely in the eyes of a few educated folk with a keen interest in these things who can spot nuances) and to stop chasing the next election win by trying to find out what's popular or by trying not to say anything that someone might not like.
asydhouse
Master Poster
Frankly I'm sick of "charismatic" politicians, and some sound details on policy are needed before you can dismiss them. The broad strokes are sounding good to me, and I can't see why you have to pretend you know they are old-fashioned.
Labour chased the Tory vote by abandoning the concept of persuasion and genuine alternative. That's why I stopped voting for them, years ago when they failed to make the argument for immigration and instead bowed to tabloid scare-mongering and followed the Tories' lead.
How anyone could be a Labour supporter for decades, vote for them when they were promising more austerity last year, and now abandon them for talking like a proper alternative with socialist notions, is beyond me.
His speech at the conference yesterday was delivered well and made a lot more sense than anything the PLP has been shovelling this last year. He looks and sounds like the kind of man I'd like to have as a Prime Minister.
Sorry Archie, socialism is not electable in the UK. It also wasn't in Australia. Labor learnt and changed. Hawke and Keating transformed Australia, now comfortably in the G20. Corbyn and socialist Labour is not electable.
This is the bit that confuses me. What was missing from the Left-leaning message that the Labour Party had at the last election (and got them soundly walloped) ?
As far as I can see, Corbyn is just taking the message from 2015 - a fairer society funded by increased taxes, reducing inequality and properly funding infrastructure and public services and adding the following policies harking back to the 1970s
- A return to public ownership for large parts of the economy
- Messing about with education yet again - this time by resurrecting centralised control of education after decades of decentralisation. After all what better way to respond to local educational needs than a Whitehall bureaucracy
- A return to the labour relations of the 1970s by setting management and unions against each other once again
asydhouse
Master Poster
Exactly. The PLP panicked and wasted months when they should have been listening to the desire of the members for a real alternative direction. They lost two national elections, and for some reason still thought they could tinker with their failed policies and win next time. They showed themselves to be not fit to govern by that panic. They have completely abandoned the idea of creating policies and educating the voters to understand and accept them.
Perhaps a few years of working towards that are necessary. The perceived need to win immediately at any cost has led them out onto a plank above the deep blue sea.
I'm going on Corbyn's performance over the last 30-40 years. His political compass over that period has not wavered one jot. The idea that he has suddenly had a Damascene moment has has become a progressive Social Democrat is laughable.
Socialism is a minority viewpoint in the UK and has been for decades. If people are going to be persuaded to completely change their stance then they'll need someone persuasive to do it. Corbyn is not, and has never been, that man.
"New Labour" managed to achieve an enormous amount while they were in office, helping to reverse 18 years of Conservative cuts to public services and starting to correct the worst of the income and wealth inequalities.
Could they have taken a more radical approach ? No doubt but then if they were advocating that then they wouldn't have got elected.
The Corbyn Labour Party will be an excellent opportunity to test whether the UK is ready for a Left-wing alternative. If the Labour Party starts to make significant gains then I will admit that I was wrong. If, as I expect, Labour fails to make significant electoral progress then they need to decide whether they want to stick to their principles and become a marginal party or do what New Labour did, compromise on some aspects (such as public ownership of the means of production) in order to be able to deliver on others (better funding for the NHS and reduced child poverty).
See my first point above....
I could vote for someone who is proposing 21st century social democracy, but nothing I have seen so far has persuaded me that Corbyn has changed his spots.
....and I think that you are exactly the audience that the Labour Party is aiming at (recalling what I can about the biographical details you have posted over the years) but I fear that you are very much in the minority when it comes to the country as a whole.