BS: electing a new labour leader

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 20 Aug 15 - 07:57 AM

Jim, I am not an "ultra-nationalist" or anything else.

I did not make "excuses like Irish people were given the choice to move to the area they wished."
You misunderstood me.
I was saying that the borders were chosen to leave as many as possible on the correct side.

In what sense was Ireland "still reeling from the results of the Famine?"

Have you an answer to the previous question I put Jim?
What choice?
That "tiny minority" were battle hardened, well armed and determined to fight against being subsumed into the new state.
The South could not fight them, and the British Army would not.
What choice?

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: GUEST,Fred McCormick
Date: 20 Aug 15 - 05:11 AM

McGrath of Harlow. "Just put my vote in. Went for Angela Eagle,"

Angela Eagle is my MP and she impresses not in the least, either as a constituency MP or as a committed socialist.

Thereby hangs the trouble, and the reason why Jeremy Corbyn is storming ahead. The MPs who should be representing the interests of ordinary people just aren't there.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 20 Aug 15 - 04:35 AM

Should read "I don't believe for one minute an ultra-nationalist like Keith...."
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 20 Aug 15 - 04:31 AM

"And there would have been a bloodbath had partition not taken place as Keith has said"
There was a bloodbath immediately following the signing of the treaty and there as been a continuing bloodbath ever since - and will continue to be while the border remains.
What on earth is partonising about suggesting that no minority should be given the governance of six counties on the basis of their religion and that on that basis, those counties should continue to be part of another nation.
Simple exercise - put Britain in the same situation.
I don't for one minute an ultra-nationalist like Keith believes the guff he is putting up - excuses like Irish people were given the choice to move to the area they wished.
At the time of the signing of the treaty, Ireland was still reeling from the results of the Famine, yet it was forced to sign away the rights to the six richest, most fertile and most developed counties in order to appease a religious minority
"Would it have been better to hand over all of Ireland to the Republicans?"
The "Republicans" then were a different bread than the ones that followed, who were a direct result of the Catholic persecution which arose from the creation of an aggressive Protestant state.
It is often forgotten that 'The Troubles' of the seventies arose from the brutal putting down of peaceful marches demanding equal rights in the six counties, when the police directed banner-carrying men, women and children through howling mobs of stone-throwing Loyalists - that was the birth of terrorism in Northern Ireland - and it didn't take long for it to spread to mainland Britain.
The irony of all this is that, personally, far from being a nationalist, I regard national barriers as barriers to international co-operation - I am an 'Internationalist' if anything, but I have come to realise that while partition remains we will continue to count the body-bags.
"At least everyone had somewhere to go"
Now that's what I call patronising
Jim

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 20 Aug 15 - 04:25 AM

Instead, the British decided to succumb to the will of a tiny minority

What choice Jim?
That tiny minority were well armed and determined to fight against being subsumed into the new state.
The South could not fight them, and the British Army would not.
What choice?

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: GUEST,Musket laughing
Date: 20 Aug 15 - 04:12 AM

We voted against independence.

The idea of the outcome making independence a done deal is delusional to say the least. I suppose if you took away the many families relying on income from their work at the military bases including Trident, the whole BP economy of Aberdeen and the financial institutions of the central belt, you might have just about swayed it the other way.

Except you'd be arguing how to distribute the bags of rice from flown in UN charter flights and NGO aid workers.

Anyway. Read the SNP stuff from the referendum properly. "Negotiate" is all over the NATO and Trident promises. They know Scotland is too strategically placed for NATO to lose it. They'd need the income too.

Still. I'd happily vote SNP other than their pipe dream. They are a liberal party whose slogan is Prosperity through Equality. Very laudable and the exact opposite of what some shallow fools think they stand for.

Labour? I'll worry about such things when and if we move back to England.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: GUEST,Dave
Date: 20 Aug 15 - 03:30 AM

Jim, you are displaying a partizanship which I thought that we were over after Good Friday. Whatever happened, someone was going to have to live is a country whose values were very different from theirs, someone was going to have their rights denied. And there would have been a bloodbath had partition not taken place as Keith has said, and you really must give Keith the respect to think about what he writes, rather than just a knee jerk railing against it. Could it have been handled better? Probably. Would it have been better to hand over all of Ireland to the Republicans? Definitely not. Same with India, although Gandhi was much against it, the partition was almost certainly the least bad option in 1947. At least everyone had somewhere to go.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: GUEST,Dave
Date: 20 Aug 15 - 03:22 AM

Allen,

You are right in that the failure to contest the smear was a major Labour failing. Labour should have welcomed the suggestion that they work with the SNP to get rid of the tories, which was, and is, an overriding priority.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: GUEST,Allan Conn
Date: 20 Aug 15 - 02:39 AM

I wouldn't say independence is certain but I think it is looking more likely than it was prior to the referendum. Most people were predicting, and the initial polls were prediciting, a much bigger No vote than the outcome eventually showed. Even though it wasn't quite enough all the momentum was with Yes and the SNP and that momentum has continued since. Certainly for the party anyway. Who would have predicted a year ago that after a referendum defeat the SNP would get 50% of the vote in the Westminster election and win every seat bar 3 - and that they would now be 62% in the polls for the Holyrood election! I think also the idea of it is better to work with us lefties down south than leave idea has been pretty damaged too because of the general election campaign. The Tories ran an overtly anti-Scottish smear campaign and Labour were cowed by it totally failing to condemn the tone of the Tory campaign. So both parties tried to win votes in England by demonising the potential Nats in Westminster abd both parties plus the Lib Dems suffered in Scotland because of it. The Tory vote dropped despite the Labour and Lib Dem collapse. Dropped slightly only probably because they are basically at their rock bottom core vote anyway! So interesting times.

Corbyn is despite being around for a long time potentially a new face for Labour and yes the Nats would work with him at Westminster level but there is a lingering resentment and distrust among many in Scotland over the Labour general election tactics and there are two possible real clashes too. Corbyn in a recent speech said that any potential new referendum was a decision up to "the Scottish people, the Scottish parliament and the UK parliament". Not quite sure what he means by that but if he is suggesting Westminster would need to agree - thus giving a veto to the UK as a whole and denying self determination to the Scottish electorate - then he is heading for a clash with the Scottish gvt at some point. Secondly he can say he'll work with the SNP but I don't think everyone in England quite realizes just how much the Scottish Labour party and SNP are at loggerheads in Scotland. I can't imagine Kezia Dugdale looking forward to working with a party she clearly despises and I imagine Sturgeon would take delight in causing a wee bit mischief by openly working directly with Corbyn rather than what the SNP regard as the Branch Office of Labour in Scotland.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 19 Aug 15 - 08:01 PM

"The unionists demanded to remain in the union,"
We seem to have lost the fantasy pf people choosing to live where they wanted to - where on earth did that come from.
It doesn't matter what the Unionists wanted - they were in a tiny minority in the whole of Ireland so they would have had t intergrated into a united Ireland or leave.
Instead, the British decided to succumb to the will of a tiny minority and place them in charge of of the six counties subjecting Ireland to nearly a century of bloodshed and unrest.
The non-Catholics who remained in the South had no problem integrating into the new state -they have their own church, they take a full part in the running of Ireland - no persecution, no prejudice, no bigotry - they play a full part in the life of the Republic of Ireland, and always have.
Ireland is Ireland - one single country, one culture, one people - to divide it in the way it was led to persecution, ongoing bloodshed and unrest.
Partition was a political move supported by religious radicals.
The the Unionists should have either accepted the will of the majority or have gone elsewhere.
If an ethnic minority in Britain decided they did not wish to live under British rule and culture, what do you suggest - give them six counties and leave them to it
Please don't be stupid.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 19 Aug 15 - 07:15 PM

I'd tend to agree with you about Scottish independence being pretty certain. But the matter of timing is important. If we don't get a reformed UK voting system we're facing a pretty dire future down here, and the best hope of that is goverment backed by the Scots that can push through a reform that means we don't need Scottish help in defanging the Tories.

But if I was a Scot I'd probably want a breakaway tomorrow, and leave it to the English to reform themselves. But I really would rather not have a permanent Tory government, elected on a minority vote, on my southern border.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: akenaton
Date: 19 Aug 15 - 06:57 PM

I really think Scottish independence is a "done deal" Mr McGrath and certainly failing to oppose trident outright will make independence more likely.
It doesn't look like the Scottish branch office has learned anything from its recent humiliating defeat, but I can muster no sympathy for them, they have failed the Scottish people, who remained loyal to a bunch of corrupt toadies for far too long.
I stopped voting Labour and joined the SNP BB(Before Blair) and have never regretted it. I have watched them ditch every principle the founders fought for to achieve government..... and what did they give us? War, Privatisation and huge wealth differentials.

Good luck to Jeremy, but can he beat the media and straighten a twisted society?... I doubt it, but at least it will be a start.
I just hope those who wallowed in the Blair years are ashamed of themselves.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 19 Aug 15 - 06:31 PM

Actually Miss Dugdale has hedged her bets on that one, saying she thought the option of dispensing with Trident should be part of the discussion.

it's pretty clear that if Labour in Scotland is serious about getting back some influence up there, they,ll have to recognise that the issue of Trident was a massive vote loser for them.

The best hope of that happening, is for Courbyn as Labour leader rattherthan any of the other three - and that might also be the best way to get the SNP to hang fire on deciding to go for independance soon, because the prospect of a socialist Westminster government would be likelt to have an impact on voting in a new referendum.

And of course if the SNP felt Labour under Corbyn would not be likely to win, that would also be an excellent reason for delaying, since the prospectof a permanent Yory government wpuld pretty certainly mean a landslide majority for a brekaway.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: akenaton
Date: 19 Aug 15 - 06:05 PM

I think labour have a death wish, they are riven with disagreements.
Mr Corbyn, the probable choice for UK leader is opposed to nuclear weapons and the renewal of Trident, while the newly elected leader of Scottish labour, Miss Dugdale proposes a "multilateral approach", code for the retention of WMD's on Scottish soil.
Never mind, she has appointed an equalities spokesperson, that should keep the Blairites happy.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: DMcG
Date: 19 Aug 15 - 05:55 PM

Sorry, de-cookied above!

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: DMcG
Date: 19 Aug 15 - 05:55 PM

Sorry, de-cookied above!

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: GUEST
Date: 19 Aug 15 - 05:50 PM

On the topic of electing a new leader for labour. I got an email at 6:30 this evening saying there was a Corbyn rally in my town. It is in a hall that can seat 700. Within four hours 872 people have responded, and I imagine some will have several people, as you could ask for multiple places on your response. Maybe 872 is the total number of places assigned, I'm not sure.

Either way the number of people saying they will attending is far in excess of the hall a few hours after it was announced. Maybe it is all froth, we will see. But I think the Conservatives will be worried about this, as well as the upper echelons of Labour. Neither is likely to know how to deal with it, but at least the Conservatives can hope the enthusiasm will burn itself out before the next election - and they'd probably be right.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 19 Aug 15 - 05:34 PM

🎼 🎶 "When will they ever learn, when will they e-e-ever learn? 🎶

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 19 Aug 15 - 05:13 PM

Which has what to do with electing a new labour leader exactly? Or are we just back to the Keith and Jim show?

What have you done with the baby?
I have thrown him out of the window!
I said pull the rope!
That's the way to do it!

Well, it is folk entertainment I suppose :-)

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 19 Aug 15 - 04:01 PM

People were not expected to move anywhere

Correct.
The borders were chosen so as few people as possible would be on the wrong side.

The unionists demanded to remain in the union, were well armed, and were determined to go to war if not given self determination.
They were militarily stronger than the South, and British officers threatened to resign rather than fight them.
What would you have done Jim?

The violence in Ireland started long before the partition and continued long after it.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 19 Aug 15 - 03:07 PM

"Saudi Arabia is not a sectarian state."
Didn't say it wasn't Dave - lots of countries are or aspire to be mono-religious- sectarian.
My point refers to countries which have been forcibly partitioned.
Ireland was forcibly divided in order to create a Protestant State which remained part of the United Kingdom - this was Britain's response was to demands for complete independence (as was happening throughout the Empire) - partition.
The signing of the treaty led to a bloody civil war which lasted a year - inter-community violence, based on the rights given to the dominant religion, has been a fact of life ever since.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: GUEST,Dave
Date: 19 Aug 15 - 02:43 PM

Jim,

I think you are being unreasonable here, under your definition Saudi Arabia is not a sectarian state.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 19 Aug 15 - 02:40 PM

"The policy was to place as many people as possible on the side they would choose."
Nonsense
People were not expected to move anywhere - they were not chess pieces.
The plan was to divide the country as it stood into a Catholic and Protestant state
Do you honestly think a treaty aimed at expecting people to up-sticks and shift would ever have been contemplated - it took
enough, bullying, blackmail and threats of war to get it signed as it stood?
"The creation of two sectarian states"
No - one sectarian state - Catholicism was the overwhelmingly dominant religion in Ireland and once the treaty was signed, there was no inter,religious conflict in the 26 states - no sectarianism.
"India?"
India has been involved in four wars since the creation of Pakistan.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: akenaton
Date: 19 Aug 15 - 02:27 PM

Fortunately I no longer have to vote labour, but if I did it would certainly be Jeremy.....think I would have to "draw the line" after that.......perhaps Angela.

Not that it matters much, the big hope is for a split and send the Blairites packing.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 19 Aug 15 - 02:23 PM

if you draw a line across any country, you sign up for generations of violence until that line disappears

India?
In this case, the unionist population of Ulster made it quite clear that they would go to war if the line was NOT drawn.

Three counties were originally proposed, then hastily dropped when it was calculated that they would provide a Catholic majority - it was a deliberate and stated policy to create a Protestant state.

The policy was to place as many people as possible on the side they would choose.
What is your objection?

The creation of a sectarian state
The creation of two sectarian states, if that is defined as a state with a religious majority.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: akenaton
Date: 19 Aug 15 - 02:21 PM

:0)

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 19 Aug 15 - 02:14 PM

Just put my vote in. Went for Angela Eagle, with Stella Creasy followed by Tom Watson and Ben Bradshaw,
.
There should be a woman to go with Jeremy as Leader. But I draw the line at Caroline Flint.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 19 Aug 15 - 12:38 PM

I'll be very happy if whoever becomes Leader actually OPPOSES the pile of Old Etonian Shite currently running the country for their own selfish ends.

Time Her Majesty's Opposition began to do what it says on the tin.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 19 Aug 15 - 11:08 AM

"The boundaries were deliberately chosen to include as many unionists as possible within the union,"
Three counties were originally proposed, then hastily dropped when it was calculated that they would provide a Catholic majority - it was a deliberate and stated policy to create a Protestant state.
There was no question of there ever being anything but a Catholic majority in the rest of Ireland.
The creation of a sectarian state immediately instigated anti Catholic feeling which led to regular violence, and erupted into open warfare in the seventies.
The violence has remained a reality in the State right up to fairly recently.
One of the unwritten laws of nationality is that if you draw a line across any country, you sign up for generations of violence until that line disappears - that will remain the case in the six Northern counties.
"Neil Kinnok"
about as reliable guide as Tory Blur
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: GUEST,Fred McCormick
Date: 19 Aug 15 - 10:32 AM

Ahh, the horns of the dilemma. I'm definitely voting for Corbyn as party leader, with Andy Burnham as my probable second choice.

Regarding the choice of deputy, I first thought of Tom Watson - campaigner on several important issues such as child abuse and phone hacking. But then he voted in favour of the Iraq war, and has subsequently voted against holding an inquiry into the same. Just in case Watson has forgotten, the Iraq war is precisely the reason why so many Labour stalwarts left, and was a major contributory factor as to why the party is in the state it's currently in.

But having read the campaign literature of the others, and watched them in action, I can't see how one could possibly slide a fag paper between Eagle, Bradshaw, Creasby and Flint.

To put that another way. Does anyone know of a single left wing credential among any of them?

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: GUEST
Date: 19 Aug 15 - 10:24 AM

Stop blaming the wrong bogey man

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: GUEST
Date: 19 Aug 15 - 10:15 AM

But he did not call a ballot. Read what Neil Kinnok has to say about the conflict and start blaming the wrong bogey man

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 19 Aug 15 - 10:10 AM

I wouldn't know BWM... :-P

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 19 Aug 15 - 10:09 AM

Or a 1970s porn star... 😜

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 19 Aug 15 - 09:56 AM

I like the sound of a Corbyn-Creasy team. If nothing else it alliterates and sounds like a 1950's film star...

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 19 Aug 15 - 09:39 AM

On a large scale, the six Counties of Northern Ireland were deliberately chosen to provide a Protestant majority - three counties of Ulster were rejected because that would have put the balance in facour of the Catholics - classical gerrymandering.

Not at all.
The boundaries were deliberately chosen to include as many unionists as possible within the union, and to allow as many nationalists as possible to be outside the union.
It was an attempt to please most of the people most of the time, which is all you can hope to do in a plural society.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 19 Aug 15 - 09:36 AM

"Thatcher contributed to the closure of pits "
Thatcher CLOSED the pits with the help of Ian McGregor -
Scargill had no alternative but to oppose a deliberate policy which included (to start with), the proposal of 64,000 (from 202,000 to 138,000) redundancies - that was what he his job.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: akenaton
Date: 19 Aug 15 - 09:01 AM

I meant the journey would not be pleasant, not the end product....if there ever is one......perhaps change like the universe "goes on for ever"?

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: GUEST
Date: 19 Aug 15 - 09:00 AM

Thatcher contributed to the closure of pits but Scargill by his refusal to hold a ballot made sure there was no future for miners in this country. Miners lions led by a Donkey.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: GUEST
Date: 19 Aug 15 - 08:53 AM

"[gerrymandering]"
On a large scale, the six Counties of Northern Ireland were deliberately chosen to provide a Protestant majority - three counties of Ulster were rejected because that would have put the balance in facour of the Catholics - classical gerrymandering.
On a smaller scale, Dame Shirley Porter in Westminster, deliberately moved council tenants out of their homes into a neighboring borough in order to create a Conservative majority.
This was carried out under the pretext of repairing the property, which was in fact gentrified and put on the market.
All this was compounded by the fact that the property the original tenants were moved into was riddled with asbestos, putting the health and even the lives of the occupants at risk - gerrymandering at the most extreme.
Dame Shirl later did a runner and settled Israel, owing Britain £30m
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 19 Aug 15 - 08:44 AM

Not very pleasant? That might depend on what matters to you. I'd incline to agree with what William Morris wrote after visiting a poor but equal society in Iceland: "the most grinding poverty is a trifling evil compared with the inequality of classes.

Inequality is far too high a price to pay for affluence, even if that actually was on offer. And in fact the evidence is that it isn,t, in the kong run.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: Peter K (Fionn)
Date: 19 Aug 15 - 07:53 AM

I don't think much of the one [intellect] belonging to the self-opinionated Mr R Bridge

Irony, or what?

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: akenaton
Date: 19 Aug 15 - 07:50 AM

I agree Al, but socialism is the only real alternative.
It wont be very pleasant, but it may just prevent the total destruction of society.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 19 Aug 15 - 07:46 AM

I'm not sure I want a socialist government. However I'm fed up withEngland being run for bankers, for monetarism, the ultra rich, for the undiscerning and uncaring.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: akenaton
Date: 19 Aug 15 - 06:21 AM

Oh sorry, I thought M meant the socio/economic system.

If socialism is ever to become accepted by the UK electorate, it will have to be via PR.......

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 19 Aug 15 - 06:14 AM

plus rearrangements of election districts [gerrymandering] that have contributed to election results.

Not happened yet.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 19 Aug 15 - 06:10 AM

Alternative vote referendum

Unfortunately it was not a good choice. Sort of 'What would you like, a slap round the head or a kick up the arse?'

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: akenaton
Date: 19 Aug 15 - 06:05 AM

M....I don't remember ever being given the chance to change the system through the ballot box?

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 19 Aug 15 - 05:59 AM

More of the British people didn't put any bits of paper in ballot boxes than voted for any of the parties. Except in Scotland.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 19 Aug 15 - 05:57 AM

I know all that, Dick: but my point remains that only 4 years ago a referendum was held in which the entire electorate was given the chance to express support for changing this present system; but overwhelmingly voted to keep it.

So what do you suggest should be done?

≈M≈