BS: Politics: UK Labour leadership election

Subject: RE: BS: Polics: UK Labour leadership election
From: GUEST,achmelvich
Date: 04 Aug 15 - 03:47 PM

as this topic looks set to drop off the live charts could i ask why there are usually 2/3 times as many threads on music etc than on general stuff. sorry if this question has been asked before.....

Subject: RE: BS: Polics: UK Labour leadership election
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 04 Aug 15 - 03:50 PM

There appears to have been a tightening of Moderation Controls.

Subject: RE: BS: Polics: UK Labour leadership election
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 04 Aug 15 - 06:02 PM

Again, agreed BWM. And, NO, ake. Go away and read some statistics.

Subject: RE: BS: Polics: UK Labour leadership election
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 04 Aug 15 - 09:01 PM

I think you mean "reactionary and backward looking" not "radical".(Richard Bridge)

Surely "radical" can properly be used to refer to reactionary and backward looking political ideologies, provided they are drastic enough in destroying the status quo, more especially the good things that existed. As in the case of Isis or Thatcherism, or the present government.

If we had a decent society the important thing wouldn't be to try to change it, but to protect it from destructive changes. We could all be genuine conservatives with a good conscience...

Subject: RE: BS: Polics: UK Labour leadership election
From: GUEST,achmelvich
Date: 05 Aug 15 - 03:23 AM

i agree, i used 'radical' to mean drastic -though right wing (fascist? or neo fascist?) change. political terminology has become very confusing - especially the 'liberal' term. i think republicans (as in trump and palin not mcguinness and adams) regard liberals as communists. american neo-liberal global capitalists are heavily indebted to chinese communists party who are, of course, the most currentlly successful capitalists on the planet. politically, 'liberal' has so many interpretations that perhaps all meaning is obscure or lost. is the new liberal leader more liberal than the previous neoconsevative enabler leader clegg? i think there still as a 'Liberal' party (presumably holding on to a traditional view of what liberal is - as opposed to 'liberal democrats'

of course it's all very confussing - i prefer to stick to the old marxist definitions of bosses and workers. or if i'm being really modern - banging on about the crimes of the 1%. in supporting JC in for the labour leadership am i being a conservative, or at least, traditional - conservative?

Subject: RE: BS: Polics: UK Labour leadership election
From: akenaton
Date: 05 Aug 15 - 04:43 AM

It's even more complicated than that , one can be a social conservative, and also a political radical.

One cannot be a social conservative and a "liberal".

One cannot be a liberal and a "liberal"

This forum has a coterie of the most illiberal "liberals".

Subject: RE: BS: Polics: UK Labour leadership election
From: Peter K (Fionn)
Date: 05 Aug 15 - 05:03 AM

Those like Fred who warm to Corbyn but accept the received wisdom that he can't win a general election might be interested in these thoughts from the senior Tory ex-minister Ken Clarke, former Chancellor of the Exchequer, Home Secretary, etc, etc.

Subject: RE: BS: Polics: UK Labour leadership election
From: akenaton
Date: 05 Aug 15 - 07:36 AM

I believe Jeremy could win a GE Peter, and I would love to see it, but could he make the current economic system work to our satisfaction?.....He would have to make so many compromises that any inspirational movement would be disarmed.

I remember Miss Short a leftish politician who joined Blair's War Cabinet and sabotaged the huge grass roots movement against the war.

Had she joined Mr Cook in resigning everything may have been different, but she now says she thought she could fight better from "inside the Tent"....the famous cry of the hypocritical left.

The only way we will get change is through a popular movement, a charismatic leader, and a population which REALLY wants change

Still a long way off unfortunately.....or perhaps fortunately. :0(

Subject: RE: BS: Polics: UK Labour leadership election
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 05 Aug 15 - 02:53 PM

What is ake on? And on about?

Subject: RE: BS: Polics: UK Labour leadership election
From: Peter K (Fionn)
Date: 05 Aug 15 - 04:01 PM

Clare Short was in the band of opportunists who took over the Labour Party after John Smith died. Any suggestion that Corbyn's cast from that same mould would be far wide of the mark.

I agree with Ake that if Corbyn wins, he will face an onslaught from all manner of interests vested in the status quo. Wilson had to cope with MI5 scheming against him; Michael Foot was falsely exposed as a Soviet spy. Corbyn has all that crap ahead of him and worse. But where does the fight start, if not here?

I don't know if anyone remembers that disturbing telly drama, A Very British Coup (requires registration to view, probably UK only)? For some reason it's writer, Chris Mullins, has decided the time is right for a sequel....

Subject: RE: BS: Polics: UK Labour leadership election
From: akenaton
Date: 05 Aug 15 - 04:21 PM

I didn't mean to compare Claire to Jeremy Peter. I was simply illustrating how the guts can be removed from an inspirational grass roots movement by compromise(which will be in Jeremy's case, unavoidable.)

The worst possible option, is to give the impression that the system can be managed.

Subject: RE: BS: Polics: UK Labour leadership election
From: The Sandman
Date: 05 Aug 15 - 07:37 PM

Michael Foot was falsely exposed as a Soviet spy"
I thought that accusation was made against Wilson,
Harold Wilson conspiracy theories
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Harold Wilson in 1974

Since the mid-1970s, a variety of conspiracy theories have emerged centring on British Labour Prime Minister Harold Wilson who served as the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom from 1964 to 1970 and 1974 to 1976, winning four general elections. These range from Wilson having been a Soviet agent (a claim which MI5 investigated and found to be false), to Wilson being the victim of treasonous plots by conservative-leaning elements in MI5 - the latter being claims which Wilson himself made.

Subject: RE: BS: Polics: UK Labour leadership election
From: Peter K (Fionn)
Date: 05 Aug 15 - 09:31 PM

Here you go, GSS: Sunday Times pays Foot damages over KGB claim. Incidentally I had occasion to down many pints of Beamish in Vinnies, Rosie's, Levis' etc during a pleasant few days last week, and my pal bought a painting from a chap called Bruno. Alas you were not around.

Ake, if Corbyn is not the solution (or the start of it), what do you think is? Does it mean nothing that people are turning out in thousands for a guy who wants to ditch Trident, get us out of NATO and take the utilities back into public ownership? We can debate dialectic materialism as much as we like with the handful of folk still clinging to the remnants of CPG, SPGB, and the rest, but what's that going to achieve beyond giving you a warm glow? Someone needs to motivate the maases, and that's what Corbyn's trying to do. I hope he pulls it off.

Subject: RE: BS: Polics: UK Labour leadership election
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 06 Aug 15 - 03:28 AM

The con-servatives are the rich making war on the poor (and TCs who believe their lies). You cannot oppose that by supporting the con-servatives, or accepting all or any of their poisonous core belief.

Subject: RE: BS: Polics: UK Labour leadership election
From: GUEST,Dave
Date: 06 Aug 15 - 03:35 AM

MI5 under Hollis and Furnival-Jones were right in the pockets of the Tories, and would be formenting rumours and distrust against any Labour leader. Ironically there were also rumours that Hollis was a Soviet agent, possibly started in revenge.

Subject: RE: BS: Polics: UK Labour leadership election
From: akenaton
Date: 06 Aug 15 - 04:21 AM

Richard Bridge....that is simplistic nonsense.
Many of my neighbours are what used to be known as "one nation Conservatives", they are not monetarists or fascists, just people with conservative social values, who believe that the Tory party are better at running a Capitalist economy than a Socialist party.
They are undeniably correct in that assumption, given the past record of successive administrations.
I would hope that you do not label the Blair government as in any way Socialist.
Peter is correct as usual, we need to make a start on a complete change in the system, but the point is that we need to take these good sensible people with us, not fight or demonise them.
Socialism will mean a fall in wasteful living standards for many, and hard work for generations who have become embedded into the benefits culture......we need to inspire everyone but the rulers of capitalism, that there is a better way for people to exist than the financial aspiration which drives folks at this time, and that the sacrifices will be worth making in social terms.

As a lifelong socialist, I fervently hope Jeremy can succeed in his leadership bit and in a GE, but I feel that to implement change, the UK electorate need a shock which goes right to the heart of their comfort zone, cuts through the chains of the benefit system and blunts financial aspiration.

The good Jeremy is , I'm afraid, not the person to provide such a shock.   He will be ritually crucified......Hope I'm wrong.

Subject: RE: BS: Polics: UK Labour leadership election
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 06 Aug 15 - 05:12 AM

"Embedded into the benefits culture..." Translator's note: thrown on to the scrapheap during Thatcher's determined drive to destroy our industrial base.

Subject: RE: BS: Polics: UK Labour leadership election
From: DMcG
Date: 06 Aug 15 - 06:44 AM

Moving away from these rather abstract ideas, how do you think each of the candidates would address the current tube strike (Hint: saying it's all up to the mayor will be recognised as just a cop-out and regarded with scorn)

Subject: RE: BS: Polics: UK Labour leadership election
From: Peter K (Fionn)
Date: 06 Aug 15 - 07:04 AM

All four will profess to see some merit in the workers' cause until they are in power. Then three will say, regardless of any facts in the matter, that the bosses were right all along.

Subject: RE: BS: Polics: UK Labour leadership election
From: DMcG
Date: 06 Aug 15 - 07:11 AM

One thing that intrigues me is that for all the talk of "Maggie destroying the unions" I don't remember her trying this one, and if she did she didn't succeed, presumably because you can stockpile coal but not daily journeys

Subject: RE: BS: Polics: UK Labour leadership election
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 06 Aug 15 - 08:47 AM

I imagine Jeremy Corbyn would point out that there's only a strike because management are trying to impose major changes to work conditions, and have effectively refused to negotiate a deal.

People don't vote to strike and go on strike for fun.

Subject: RE: BS: Polics: UK Labour leadership election
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 06 Aug 15 - 09:42 AM

What Kevin said

Subject: RE: BS: Polics: UK Labour leadership election
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 06 Aug 15 - 09:46 AM

Hateon - bullshit. The idea that the economic crisis was caused by labour overspending is a piece of the lying propaganda from the right wing press that TCs swallow.

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10207460470495934&set=gm.968800589809613&type=1&theater


http://www.rt.com/uk/311653-austerity-labour-poll-nonsense/



FFS if you are the communist you say that you are, take the fight to the capitalists instead of relaying their propaganda.

Subject: RE: BS: Polics: UK Labour leadership election
From: akenaton
Date: 06 Aug 15 - 12:53 PM

Oh no Richard, the population overspent, but successive govts including "Labour" governments encouraged them to overspend.

The banking system was deregulated by the Tories and further deregulated by Blair and Brown, "plenty of credit, no need to worry about whether you can afford it or not".....can't blame them for trying to make capitalism work, can we.

Regarding govt spending, we can only spend what money is produced by the economy.....and we are producing little.

At present we are involved in a holding operation. Soon the dam will burst.

Subject: RE: BS: Politics: UK Labour leadership election
From: GUEST,Shimrod
Date: 07 Aug 15 - 02:59 AM

There was an interesting article in yesterday's Independent newspaper by one of their economics editors, Ben Chu. He made the point that if an organisation is to move forward, it has to invest for the future and such organisation's often need to borrow in order to invest. In the current business world, companies are not investing enough in R&D, new equipment etc. because shareholders are demanding short term gains. Governments are not investing enough either but, instead, are obsessed, like Osborne, in 'reducing their deficits'. Chu asserts that the failure of governments to borrow and invest - in things like infrastructure (and, I would add, education) - is storing up trouble for the future and reducing the ability of nation states to grow. Corbyn is proposing to borrow in order to invest (orthodox economics) and is labelled as an 'extremist'! In a sane world, Osborne should wear the extremist label. But the pernicious cult of neo-liberalism has taken us so far from sanity that we no longer recognise sanity when we see it!

Subject: RE: BS: Politics: UK Labour leadership election
From: Stu
Date: 07 Aug 15 - 06:57 AM

There is a growing realisation that capitalism as it is practiced now is not working any better than communism was in Russia before the fall of the Berlin Wall. There are two routes opening up to us now, either the Chinese version of capitalism involving a totalitarian government basically using their workforce as indentured slaves and not allowing any dissent or criticism of the system and ruling elite (we're on the road to this already) whilst increasing inequality and attempting to keep the middle classes pacified by selling them 'stuff' they don't need. Zero hours contracts and the erosion of workers rights, the heavy-handed policing of virtually every sign of dissent and the propaganda machine of right-wing, oligarch-owned media are evidence of this nightmare becoming the norm. It's why the tories and their corporate masters hate the BBC so much; any attempt at telling the truth is seen as bias. Pretty much all our politicians are in hock to this model; science-denying lackey's of multinationals that operate outside of the law of any country because they are separate entities to any country.

The other route out of the present mess is a return the sort of state intervention Corbyn (and the SNP) are proposing. Here infrastructure is taken back into the hands of the people and things like energy, public transport, education and healthcare are run for the populace and not profit. Meanwhile, the worst excesses of capitalism are curbed by regulation; capitalism is incapable of self-regulation and needs to be reigned in and made to serve the people it employs. This doesn't mean an end to entrepreneurship or big business, earning profits or getting rich, it means people and businesses recognising they part of a society and economics will not compromise our ethics or morality for their own ends.

It's time for us to grow up and start taking some responsibility for our (in)actions. We can't address climate change and the coming mass movement of entire populations it will trigger, the conflicts across the globe and the need for a more equitable global society if we stick with our new outdated economic system. We have to change, and perhaps Corbyn is one of the small stones that starts the avalanche of change we need in the UK so we can join Scotland and forge a more progressive, caring and better educated society.

Subject: RE: BS: Politics: UK Labour leadership election
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 07 Aug 15 - 07:49 AM

Well said, Stu. As I said sometime earlier though, it seems that we are crying in the wilderness. Most people seem to believe all the stuff the media are feeding them. Or is that in itself a myth propagated by the government and the press? Talking of which - In that unholy alliance, who is the organ grinder and who is the monkey? Blowed if I know :-(

Either way, you only have to look on this forum for examples of people quoting what the media have told them as if it is undoubted truth. There are times when I despair of my my fellow man!

Subject: RE: BS: Politics: UK Labour leadership election
From: akenaton
Date: 07 Aug 15 - 08:43 AM

No system can work without a change in people's attitudes, as I said the promotion of personal financial aspiration is the poison, and the "chaser", enabler, is "liberalism" and all its falsehoods.

Smoke and mirrors my friends ...:0)

Subject: RE: BS: Politics: UK Labour leadership election
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 07 Aug 15 - 10:19 AM

I'll have some of what ake is on. Not sure if I would be safe to drive a computer though.

Subject: RE: BS: Politics: UK Labour leadership election
From: GUEST,Shimrod
Date: 07 Aug 15 - 11:39 AM

I notice that our 'extremely economically competent' chancellor has just sold 'our' stake in the Royal Bank of Scotland for £1.1 bn less than 'we' paid for it! With economic competence like that we can't lose ... Oh, hang on ...?

Subject: RE: BS: Politics: UK Labour leadership election
From: akenaton
Date: 07 Aug 15 - 12:21 PM

Don't get excited chaps. Even if Jeremy wins on the first ballot, he is almost certain to lose on second choices.......none of the "liberal" candidates will have Jeremy down as "second choice", yet those who vote for Jeremy will have only the three "liberal" muppets as second choices.

Subject: RE: BS: Politics: UK Labour leadership election
From: DMcG
Date: 07 Aug 15 - 01:51 PM

Which gets us right back to the opening post! If Jeremy gets around 40% on the first round, but is then knocked out, should this have any bearing on how whoever is elected acts? They can always ignore it, but there will always be the knowledge that they are ignoring well over a third of the party faithful...

Subject: RE: BS: Politics: UK Labour leadership election
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 07 Aug 15 - 02:22 PM

It doesn't matter what the candidates have as their second choice, they only have one vote apiece. There'll be some Cooper voters who went for her because she's a woman who'll have put Corbyn as second choice, and some who went for Burnham because they think he's a more realistic leftish candidate who'd have Corbyn as second.

If Jeremy does get 40% of first preference votes, the chance of him picking up enough on the second choices to push him over 50% would be quite good. The thing is, even more than in normal elections, no one has a clue.

Subject: RE: BS: Politics: UK Labour leadership election
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 07 Aug 15 - 02:29 PM

I'd guess Liz Kendall will come last, with most of her second preference votes going to Yvette Cooper. If that puts her ahead of Andy Burnham I'd think it very likely that when his second preference votes wee shared out, that could well put Corbyn over the line. If Burnham is in second place, snd cooper's second preferences come into play, that would be more likely to help Burnham win.

But of course that all dependent on Corbyn being well in the lead, which may not happen at all.

Subject: RE: BS: Politics: UK Labour leadership election
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 07 Aug 15 - 08:58 PM

Can't vote in British elections any more, even if I would want to as I live in Ireland now.
We get Murdoch's Times daily (for the Codeword), and am appalled at the crude, stomach-churning hate campaign that paper has launched against Corbyn - from grotesque, Punch-like cartoons depicting him as a deformed monster, to attempting to associate him with I.R.A. terrorism - not even skilfully done.
Confirms all my reservations about Parliamentary Democracy when a fascist cretin like Murdoch can use his media influence to attempt to sway the British electorate.
Many years ago, in the days when the Beeb gave us a decent mix of modern drama, they put on a wonderful four-part series entitled, 'A Very British Coup' (probably the best political drama ever presented by them).
It depicted a situation where a left-wing Government was elected in Britain which lived up to its promises and began to put into place genuine reforms, ( a sort of fantasy), only to be met with all kinds of opposition from the right-wing establishment.... obstruction by civil servants, M15 engineered fatal 'accidents', attempted blackmail..... all good, passionate political drama.
After all had failed, the final shot was of American marines being parachuted on London to 'restore democracy'
The present campaign by Murdoch's bum-wipe Times gives such creations a chilling credibility.
I have too say that, despite my cynicism towards politicians' promises, I would be very tempted to cast my vote for Corbyn - anybody who can rattle the Antipodean Arsehole's cage has my respect
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Politics: UK Labour leadership election
From: akenaton
Date: 08 Aug 15 - 03:36 AM

Jim, I heard an interview on BBC5 radio, in which Jeremy failed to condemn the use of terrorism by Irish republicans.
He was being badgered by the interviewer, and I feel that he simply didn't like the tone, but I'm sure it came across as being evasive.

The media can crucify people very easily, Jeremy was trying to show the bombing campaign in context....BUT   terrorism must be condemned no matter who does it.
Personally I think "terrorism" encompass many policies even economic sanctions, so it is a complicated point, but he made a serious mistake and there is no use in trying to deflect it.

Subject: RE: BS: Politics: UK Labour leadership election
From: DMcG
Date: 08 Aug 15 - 04:11 AM

I didn't hear the interview so can't comment specifically. But in general it is extremely difficult to handle questions that over simplify without sounding evasive.

Subject: RE: BS: Politics: UK Labour leadership election
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 08 Aug 15 - 04:37 AM

Jim, I heard an interview on BBC5 radio, in which Jeremy failed to condemn the use of terrorism by Irish Republicans."
Didn't hear the interview, so I can't comment, but personally, I very much doubt if he supports terrorism of any sort
We're being treated to programmes here covering the Security Forces collusion with Unionist terrorism during the Troubles - it seems one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter, to some people.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Politics: UK Labour leadership election
From: akenaton
Date: 08 Aug 15 - 04:44 AM

Yes I agree DMcG, I don't know what your politics are, but I'm sure you will agree that terrorism is always counter productive and should always be condemned. Jeremy seemed to terminate the interview while the interviewer was repeating the question.

We will never change anything by frightening people, at least not in the long term. We need to convince and inspire rather than kill and maim.....the idea of alienating people because of their voting history, as Richard is always suggesting, will always end in failure and recriminations.....People vote for all sorts of reasons and cannot be stereotyped.

Subject: RE: BS: Politics: UK Labour leadership election
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 08 Aug 15 - 05:12 AM

"but I'm sure you will agree that terrorism is always counter productive"
Always?
The Maquis and the French Resistance veterans or the A.N.C. might disagree with you there.
I find any form of violence abhorrent, particularly that aimed at civilians, but it happens in all national and international conflicts to one degree or another.
Ireland has been in the process of a balancing act throughout the course of the Peace Process - it seems that, at long last it might be making some headway - this year's Loyalist marches have been the most violence-free ones that I can remember.
Sure, let the British politicians start condemning their particular bad-flavour of the month with meaningless mouthings of condemnation to suit some particular political campaign like a Labour Party leadership election - why not - that's what politics are about.
Let's dig out photos of the Brighton Bombing or the Drop-in Well to make sure a leftie isn't elected.
Parhaps Labout Left might consider digging out the footage of a miner's wife about to be batoned by a mounted boy-in-blue at Orgeave?
Is that the kind of politicking we need?
I have to admit that when the Apartheid regime fell in South Africa, I was extremely outraged at the idea of a 'Peace and Reconciliation Committee' letting those bastards off the hook for what they'd done to the Africa people down the years - on reflection. I was wrong and I let my brutish instinct for revenge get the better of me.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Politics: UK Labour leadership election
From: akenaton
Date: 08 Aug 15 - 06:39 AM

Anyway, how JC dealt with the interview looked bad and shifty and I'm sure will have done him some damage with the electorate if he fights a GE.

The issue will be raised again and every time it is avoided, makes it all the harder to deal with finally.

What he should have said, was that he did condemn the IRA bombing campaign and other acts of terrorism unconditionally.
He could then have brought up the issues of internment and Bloody Sunday as a balance.
Now he comes across as evasive on this issue, and it will haunt him for the rest of the campaign.

In his defence, he is obviously unused to dealing with the media, and the BBC are no more unbiased than the Murdoch papers.....he allowed himself to be trapped and rattled.

Subject: RE: BS: Politics: UK Labour leadership election
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 08 Aug 15 - 08:31 AM

"looked bad and shifty"
Bit subjective, don't you think?
Sounds like every politician I've watched on the box
I think a tit-for-tat suggestion would have been a total disaster and would have given the rabid right exactly what they are looking for - a Republican sympathiser.
It probably will do him damage, but if it wasn't this. Im sure the media will find something else.
Let's face it, anybody who is handed Northern Ireland as a subject is handling an extremely hot potato.
It all boils down to (pun intended) whether you believe him to be a supporter of terrorism, personally, I don't.
Interesting letter in The Times this morning:
Jim Carroll
CORBYN'S SILENCE
Sir, David Aaronovitch writes that in 1987 Jeremy Corbyn took part in a minute's silence for the eight IRA men and one civilian killed by the British army in an ambush at Loughgall (Opinion, August 6). He describes Corbyn's action as an "utterly mistaken" and irrelevant "peace gesture" — "irrelevant" because it was the Loughgall ambush that "convinced the Provisional IRA that it could not force Britain out of Northern Ireland by military means".
The silence was largely a protest against the "shoot to kill" policy alleged to have been carried out against Republican targets by British troops. Furthermore, Loughgall was only one of many ambushes and shootings that led all sides to realise that a political solution must be found. It was the willingness of the pragmatists to take unpopular steps (such as meeting Gerry Adams) that led to the "peace process".
NEIL AUSTIN London W1

Subject: RE: BS: Politics: UK Labour leadership election
From: akenaton
Date: 08 Aug 15 - 08:46 AM

I don't think anyone, even the media would consider Jeremy to be a "supporter of terrorism", but the IRA bombing campaign in Britain was totally wrong, and the question could easily have been defused by an admission of the fact.
As I say, lack of skill in handling the media was the problem.

Subject: RE: BS: Politics: UK Labour leadership election
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 08 Aug 15 - 10:58 AM

I'd distinguish between terrorism and irregular warfare. Terrorism is violence directed at civilians and noncombatants for political reasons. Planting a bomb to blow up enemy vehicles, for example, is not terrorism. Planting a bomb in a pub is terrorism.

Some of the actions of the Maquis, the IRA, the ANC etc did involve terrorism, but by no means all, or even most. Condemning such actions is not the same thing as denying out of hand the right of such groups to carry on a military campaign in certain circumstances. It's to condemn certain types of activity, whether carried out by guerrillas or government forces.

Of course making those kinds of distinctions in the course of an interview would be difficult or even impossible.

Subject: RE: BS: Politics: UK Labour leadership election
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 08 Aug 15 - 11:43 AM

"but the IRA bombing campaign in Britain was totally wrong, "
As was the 'Trick or Treat Massacre', or the Bloody Sunday Massacre, or the re-routing of Civil Rights Marches through hordes of stone-throwing Prods (which set the whole bloody ball rolling), or, for that matter, the partitioning of Ireland in order to create a 'Protestant Province'.
No side came out of The Troubles with clean hands - nobody!
Let's face it Ake; this has been raised because of the Labour leadership race, the victims are an incidental, as far as the politicians are concerned.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Politics: UK Labour leadership election
From: DMcG
Date: 08 Aug 15 - 11:47 AM

Interviewer: Do you condemn terrorism?

response: That's a very superficial question and the short answer that yes, I condemn terrorist acts whoever carries them out. But if you want a proper response it will take all the time we have allocated for this interview. I am happy to do that. Are you?

_______



That's the shortest response I can come up with.

Subject: RE: BS: Politics: UK Labour leadership election
From: Musket
Date: 09 Aug 15 - 03:05 AM

Amazing. Supports terrorists?

Sounds as stupid and illogical as reckoning there has to be some revolution or other. If I were in Scotland, I'd possibly support SNP, especially now the Scots have roundly rejected the distracting independence nonsense. SNP are about the only liberal equality focussed party in politics now, and I salute their inclusive outlook.

There has been a revolution already, and we are now living in the post revolution ear. The two political parties offer slightly different flavours of the same thing and most people want, in one way or another, stability.

Not really the climate for a Corbyn or a Th*tcher.

Subject: RE: BS: Politics: UK Labour leadership election
From: akenaton
Date: 09 Aug 15 - 04:32 AM

The SNP have the opportunity to make SERIOUS changes to our economy and society......As an SNP member, I certainly hope so, but am not confident.
The inspirational nature of the Scottish Independence campaign contributed to the rout of Labour in Scotland. The Scottish "branch office" of the Labour Party never served the Scottish people, Labour in Scotland was often corrupt and self serving.....hardly in the mould of Mr Corbyn.

This inspiration can be used to form a new society. With the sacrifices which will be required it may be possible to make real changes which will beneficially affect the lives of millions of young and deprived people who live in poverty. Tackle drug addiction and crime.
People need to be given a purpose in life, if not, they will sink into the benefits swamp, generation by generation....and as we can see, what capitalism gives, it can easily take away.

The post above presents..."Amazing, supports terrorists".

The meaning is typically obscure, but if it is trying to infer that I think Mr Corbyn is a terrorist sympathiser, it is just as typically wrong.

Subject: RE: BS: Politics: UK Labour leadership election
From: GUEST,Fred McCormick
Date: 09 Aug 15 - 07:46 AM

The questions of when, if ever, it is right to support terrorism, and the form which that support should take are extremely complex.

It is made all the more so by a lack of anything approaching a workable definition of what exactly terrorism is.

EG., if it is right to condemn the brutal tactics of Islamic State, as it once called itself, is it not equally right to condemn the state terrorism of the West in starting the Iraq war and which was fundamental to the founding of IS? If it is right to celebrate movements of national liberation, and the European resistance movements of the 2nd world war, then how about we hear it for the IRA who, believe it or not, were merely trying to drive a foreign oppressor from their soil?

In any event, it says a lot that that this is about the nearest which Corbyn's enemies have come to digging any "dirt" up on the man. And that after 32 continuous years as an MP.

Oh, sorry, I nearly forgot. There are several closet Tory Labour donors saying they'll withdraw their support for Labour if Corbyn reinstates Clause Four.

Oh hell, the cheek of it. A "socialist" party which wants to reestablish one of its founding socialist principles. Good God. The membership will be demanding a fair and equal voting system next.

Subject: RE: BS: Politics: UK Labour leadership election
From: akenaton
Date: 09 Aug 15 - 08:00 AM

Yes Fred, but we must remember that it was the most popular and "electable" Labour politician who was instrumental in the removal of clause 4......it must be said at the behest of the media.

I think it is time to re-nationalise, but the task would be almost impossible with huge obstacles to overcome, not least the composition of the present Labour party.

Does anyone think the "big beasts" like Umunna who ducked out of this contest are likely to endorse the return of clause 4? They are "liberal" career politicians, not socialists.
They always play by the (capitalist) rules.