BS: electing a new labour leader

Subject: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: GUEST,achmelvich
Date: 17 Aug 15 - 04:34 PM

we can take it as read that whoever is elected as next labour leader is going to get loads of abuse and dirty tactics from the press and those with a vested interest in the system (even chukka umunna gave up in anticipation of this and he is probably the most capitalist-friendly of all of them)

but, were jeremy corbyn to succeeed there would be a major difference - he would have the whole-hearted support of many thousands (millions?) of previously disillusioned lefties who have never really got behind their leader in recent years.

and he may get a huge amount of credit from everyone for being the one who noticed that the emperor (free market capitalism) is naked.

cameron? osborne? IDS? bankers' bonuses and bedroom tax? selling off the country's assets?' - what the fuck were we thinking?

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 17 Aug 15 - 04:43 PM

That's the problem, Ach - most of the ordinary (I.e. Non-millionaire) people who voted for the Self-Servatives weren't thinking. They allowed themselves to be brainwashed by The Daily Liar.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 17 Aug 15 - 04:45 PM

And let's have less of the "We" - I, for one, didn't vote for those greedy, arrogant fuckers.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 17 Aug 15 - 04:48 PM

Agreed with the above.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: GUEST,achmelvich
Date: 17 Aug 15 - 04:56 PM

backwoodsman - of course, i should have prefaced that comment with ' maybe even sometime tory voters and floaters will wake up and think '......'

or just - surely we can do better than this

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: DMcG
Date: 17 Aug 15 - 05:54 PM

It is worth noting David Miliband's stance in a letter today: . "The participation of 600,000 people in the leadership election is a significant mobilisation. But the task for the Labour party is to reflect the hopes and win the trust of 60 million people". That's true, of course, but it also seems to be preparing the ground for minimising the attention paid to the 600,000

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: GUEST
Date: 17 Aug 15 - 06:15 PM

As I understand what JC has said previously, his first act is to disappoint his followers as he will become a member of the. Privy council.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 18 Aug 15 - 01:06 AM

I reel with astonishment yet again at the contempt all you lefty ideologues have for the obvious, frequently professed, preferences of the vast majority of your fellow-countrymen. Can't you bloody-well see that they have not the least desire for your doctrinaire socialism? How many more times do they have to demonstrate that, most manifestly, they don't like it - they don't trust it - they don't want it? But is the day ever going to dawn when all you intolerant know-what's-best-for-the-rest-of-us would-be autocrats who imagine yourselves to believe in 'democracy' are going to take a blind bit of notice of what the people, the δεμος, actually say they want? In our dreams!

Oh wotz da use!

≈M≈

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 18 Aug 15 - 01:33 AM

The "demos", the participants in a democracy, can only meaningfully do so if they form an informed electorate. Thanks to the activities of our media, controlled by the rich for the benefit of the rich, at present we suffer a determinedly misinformed electorate.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 18 Aug 15 - 01:41 AM

All except for the mighty-intellected Bridge.

Patronising booby...

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 18 Aug 15 - 02:33 AM

nothing wrong with having an intellect, Mike.

i think we all basically want a middle way. somehow we've got into this mess where no one wants to invest in England in anything except real estate in London.

the reason that real estate is so desirable is that we have a largely stable, law abiding liberal society. God knows how long that will continue to be the case at this rate.

its going to take a genuinely radical set of ideas to break this Satan's spell. I'm not sure left wing doctrinaire thinking holds the key. But what is certain is that we've got to stop throwing industries away, because Mrs Thatcher and her shopping basket says they've made a loss this week.

we need some of this country's wealth circulating in this country rather than flitting off to exotic climes. Or being sat on by stately aristocrats who've been rich for no reason since the 11th century.
When Iworked at British Leyland - I saw men working with 60 year old track. no wonder the the business failed.
of course the tories blamed it on the unions - but I didn't see any trouble making in my division - Aveling Barford in Grantham. We made dumper trucks.

I don't see why Riley and Morris couldn't have been revived like Skoda was, The answer is responsible investment in our own country.

I don't see any party advocating it.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: GUEST,achmelvich
Date: 18 Aug 15 - 02:40 AM

of those who expressed a preference 24% backed the tories in the last election and the government are acting in the interests of a group much smaller than that -many of whom do not live here or do all they can to avoid paying tax here.
if we had a government that insisted on providing a free, well-financed health service; support for workers' rights and for those out of work; affordable housing; no tuition fees ; support for our young people ; properly funded education system etc etc then would you say this was not acting in the interests of the majority of the population?

yes, we 'lefties' have been banging on about this for decades but we never meet any coherent argument to dissuade us. probably because they are just basic middle of the road, conservative even, politics.

yes it is exasperating, we probably are patronising but if you look at the press and the bbc government broadcasts then it is hard to understand how people can fall for the same old nonsense and bias over and over again.

those of you supporting the government do have a role to play here too - get out and sell your support of bigger bonuses for bankers, more privatisation for the NHS, more debt for students, less tax for the wealthy, higher rents on scabby flats for your kids, less job security and more war. you may find that your views are not as popular as you think -and represent far less than 24% of your community.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 18 Aug 15 - 03:00 AM

'nothing wrong with having an intellect, Mike'

.,.,

Who said there was, Al. It's just that I don't think much of the one belonging to the self-opinionated Mr R Bridge, an expert & resolute point-misser.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: GUEST,Musket
Date: 18 Aug 15 - 03:08 AM

That's the problem with democracy. Not that there is any viable alternative.

Every person who votes is an ideologue. We all have our own "if I were in charge" ideas, and most of us accept that as much as we crave them for either ourselves or some weird notion that others would wish them too, politicians have to work for all.

DMcG above pointed out that when David Milliband spoke of the 60 million that he was forgetting the few out of that number who might want Corbyn's take on the world.

If anyone hasn't noticed, there is no difference between a government that patronises its supporters and a government that patronises its supporters.

Red or blue.

Just because you associate with one, doesn't make it better than the other. It just patronises you and eases the pain whilst it shafts you as eagerly and with as much lust as the other lot.

Government is for all. The present government don't seem to appreciate this, which is why they are a bad government. Replacing it with another bad government solves fuck all. Ideology is a bit like religious faith. Use it as a moral compass by all means but don't throw it in the face of rational people or try to impose the letter of it.

On balance? If Alan Johnson isn't ever going to lead them, the wilderness awaits and they are letting down 60 million people by their trek, made harder by the fucking great chips they must carry on their shoulder.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 18 Aug 15 - 03:13 AM

Amen.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: GUEST,Shimrod
Date: 18 Aug 15 - 03:39 AM

What (rather wryly) amuses me is the current, smug, autocratic, right-of-centre, Labour leadership telling us that if Corbyn is elected as leader, Labour will lose the next election! Perhaps it should be pointed out to them that THEY lost the last two elections! And they lost 40 MPs in Scotland because the Scots wouldn't put up with their smug, London-centric assholery any longer.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 18 Aug 15 - 03:41 AM

"Can't you bloody-well see that they have not the least desire for your doctrinaire socialism?"
It is extremely patronining for a Thatcherite to presume to speak on behalf of the British people, especially with the track-record of that particular of that particular dictatorship, which stripped Britain of its industries and its employment.
Thatcher did more than any single leader to strip the British worker of a voice in their lives - now, it appears, her supporters would decide which ideas should be put before the electorate and which should not.
You would do far better explaining the damage done to Britain by your particular school of thought before you start blocking others.
"Doctrinaire Socialism" as you put it, brought some of the greatest improvements to the lives of the British people in the 20th century; your hero systematically and deliberately destroyed those improvements.
Don't presume to speak for the British people
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 18 Aug 15 - 03:46 AM

Well, good old Abe* had it right didn't he? Democracy -- the worst possible system of government except for all the others.

≈M≈

If it was -- he is one of those like Wilde & Shaw & Dorothy Parker to whom quotations get attributed whether they actually were the originator or not.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 18 Aug 15 - 03:56 AM

I don't "presume to speak for the British people", Jim. It is the bits of paper they put in the ballot box that do that. Can you really not get into your head that it is their votes that demonstrate beyond argument that it is they, not just me, who don't want the doctrinaire bullying of all you lefty lot?

And it's a bit behind the fair to go on parroting "ThatcherThatcherThatcher" as if that were any sort of useful contribution to any sort of debate at this time of day. In case you hadn't noticed, she is as dead as Queen Anne.

Regards as ever

≈M≈

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 18 Aug 15 - 04:11 AM

No Michael, you know perfectly well that it's the structure of our voting system and constituencies, together with an election campaign by the Self-Servatives that offered no policies, but relied simply on lies about the cause of the recession and scare-mongering about the relationship of Labour and the SNP, that permitted them to obtain a majority in the H of C with just 24% of total votes cast. 76% of voters didn't want a Self-Servative government.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 18 Aug 15 - 04:26 AM

"I don't "presume to speak for the British people", Jim"
In telling us what the British people want and don't want, you do exactly that.
The damage that thatcher did to Britain tore down all the advances made in working life in Britain, and removed rights that it too centuries to win - they have never been replaced, on the contrary, her twisted philosophy has been built on by those who came after her.
As usual, her supporters avoid responding to the damage she did to our lives - I think the only one offered by you is on the level of her 'making the trains run on time' ("she did some good" as a response to her support for Pinochet).
She may be dead but her legacy still thrives.
Regards back
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: Teribus
Date: 18 Aug 15 - 05:20 AM

And what are you telling us they want Jim? Who are you to speak for the British people.

Margaret Thatcher left office in 1990 - one quarter of a centry ago - since she left office there have been governments come and governments go for only 7 of those years did Britain have a Conservative Government. But for all the "left" rile and rant about her policies none of those governments reversed a single thing - why? Because what she did was required and it was effective - it worked.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 18 Aug 15 - 05:26 AM

BWM -- But [oh no not again] that's how our first past the post constituency system works. There has never [or not within living memory certainly] been a majority government according to total votes cast; and a very recent referendum of the entire electorate(2011) overwhelmingly rejected any of the proposed changes to the system.

You lot over there might not like it; but it IS, SO, the way the British people want it.

Live with it for crying out loud, and stop your bloody boring whingeing which nobody is going to listen to.

≈M≈

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 18 Aug 15 - 05:30 AM

How was any government going to re-open pits that had been derelict, flooded, ruined, and the infrastructure demolished? Where would the skilled labour come from?

Her destruction of the TU movement was so deep that no government would have been able to revive it - the Self-Servatives and their big-business/financial cronies would never countenance it, and would stop at nothing to prevent it.

No, the damage wrought on the UK by the Beast of Grantham was so complete that much of it was, and is, irreparable.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 18 Aug 15 - 05:31 AM

Is that bloody boring whingeing any different to your bloody boring whingeing about bloody boring whingeing, Michael?

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: Teribus
Date: 18 Aug 15 - 05:46 AM

Backwoodsman take a look at who did close the pits - more shut down under Labour than ever there were under the Conservatives. The NCB and a "nationalised coal industry" was great as long as you could afford to pay £250 million a day to subsidise it and keep it running. The cost of their coal was prohibitively expensive and it just did not make any economic sense for our industries to pay it in order to get power. Neither could we as a nation afford to have Trades Union Officials think and act as if they were a law unto themselves and feel that they could use their muscle to dictate to the elected government of the country.

Oh and by the way Backwoodsman if you want examples of leaders being elected on absolute minimalist turn outs look no further than the Trades Union movement (a 15% turn out is considered high!!!!).

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 18 Aug 15 - 05:48 AM

No Dave.

But they started the bbwhigeing tht I was bbwhingeing back at ...

& so ad ∞

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 18 Aug 15 - 06:17 AM

No wonder these threads get closed...

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 18 Aug 15 - 06:46 AM

"And what are you telling us they want Jim?"
Wouldn't presume to , unlike some here
"Who are you to speak for the British people."
Where have I? (don't expect a response to this - not your thing!)
"Margaret Thatcher left office in 1990 - one quarter of a centry ago"
Seems like only yesterday to those of us who bore the brunt of her policies.
"Because what she did was required and it was effective - it worked"
Or didn't work, depending on where you are living
I seem to remember your suggesting that your answer to unemployment was for us all to get on our bikes (or mini-buses for those of us with families) - ample enough proof that she bit enough adherents to have left an army of her undead behind her - including you and the member for leafy Cambridgeshire.
"You lot over there might not like it; but it IS, SO, the way the British people want it."
And parliamentary democracy affords us the opportunity to debate things and, in doing so, perhaps change what we don't like (albeit in a very limited fashion), so why not "stop your bloody boring whingeing" which we have listened to for long enough"
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 18 Aug 15 - 06:50 AM

By the way Mike "Over" where exactly
I may now live in Ireland but the bulk of my family don't
Happy to show my passport to prove where I was born (and my parent')
You people - really !!
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 18 Aug 15 - 07:29 AM

Nothing so literal as where you happen to be placed geographically or territorially, Jim. By "you over there" in this context, I always mean "over there on the left wing": the other side of this virtual debating-chamber within which we are putatively operating.

Thassall.

Nowt to do with the RoI or anything o' that.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 18 Aug 15 - 07:54 AM

"Nowt to do with the RoI or anything o' that."
Good - thank you.
I always take as confirmation that what I believe might have some foundation by the fact that "you over there on the right" are not prepared to defend the policies, past or present, of your own lot, but would much rather snide at those of us who firmly believe them to be reactionary and harmful.
Any chance of breaking the mold - Mr Oakhampton has has dipped his toe in the water by suggesting that Thatcher's policies worked.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 18 Aug 15 - 08:31 AM

Typical con-servative, Myer. No rational answer to the refutation of his poncy assertion complete with classical Greek, so resorts to abuse. Maybe he really believes what he reads in the Daily Mail. Oh, apart, of course, for its antisemitism.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: GUEST,Musket
Date: 18 Aug 15 - 09:34 AM

Notwithstanding the irreversible damage the ideology inspired policies that those behind Th*tcher did, such as shattering manufacturing industry and for some unfathomable reason thinking the service sector could prop up the stock market... Her reign was marked by divisive incompetency of the worst kind, and that has nothing to do with right or left, but pure pragmatic incompetence.

The huge rises in interest rates and emerging trade tariffs that marked her demise wiped out many of those companies she sought to help.

Mind you, Jim and Bridge, with their tiresome taunt of "Th*tcher!" to anyone who doesn't agree with their spartist bullshit don't help matters. All they do is invite the likes of Terribulus to misinform us with his warped view of a world there never was.

Hey ho.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 18 Aug 15 - 09:43 AM

You're throwing stones from afar again Muskie - if you think Thatcher's policies, her respectibalisation of greed and her dog-eat-dog philosophy is no longer relevant, please show where it is not rather that sniping from the undergrowth.
Which side are you on?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: akenaton
Date: 18 Aug 15 - 09:48 AM

No point in changing the labels, the whole of society has become infected....there is no idealism, no inspiration, skewed education and has actually made the populace dumber.

Jesus, when we were young we were going to make a better more peaceful world, eradicate poverty etc.
What have we achieved that is of any REAL value? The world is as corrupt as ever, more so....wealth differentials are obscenely wide....traditional society is being demolished
The guts have been knocked out of almost everyone...it's always someone else's fault....the Tories....the Labour party... Our moral fibre and sense of personal responsibility have been gnawed away by a virulent media and successive cowardly governments who NEED to be "electable"

What does it matter if Jeremy is not elected to government, at least someone will be saying the "unsayable".....the debate can go forward, the guilty can be exposed.

Time to tell society that "what they want" makes them sick, that a good society cannot be bought.....and will never be given, it will require work and sacrifice.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 18 Aug 15 - 09:59 AM

Happen to be a Times reader, Mr Bridgie-Fatgob; the crosswords in the Mail which I see occasionally in the Cambridge University Combination Room, are useless. Not that my choice of newspaper is any bizniz of yours, you pathetic Prodnose.

& how charming of you to throw up my origins in a faith & a demographic which I haven't considered myself as belonging to for approx the past 60 or so years. You are an antisemite, Richard Bridge. You'd have been a great asset to the SS or the Gestapo with your compulsive hatreds which you can't leave alone but keep on scratching at like a pimple. People who aren't antisemitic don't go on about it in the compulsive way you do; don't you know that, Mr Late-On-Hitlerite? It just sticks out a mile. You think you are not, but you are. Racist scumhole.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 18 Aug 15 - 10:10 AM

I used to wonder why these threads always degenerate into a combination of unmitigated twaddle and childish abuse. I once came to the conclusion that it is just a mechanism to get them closed down but I wonder if I am giving some people too much credit.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 18 Aug 15 - 10:46 AM

.. + maybe a bit of selfrighteous better·than·the·rest·of·us pomposity, eh, you funny little Gnome?

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 18 Aug 15 - 10:55 AM

No, not at all, Michael. I am no better or worse than anyone else. Just different.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: akenaton
Date: 18 Aug 15 - 10:57 AM

The debate here is about whether the election of Jeremy to leadership of the labour Party, is a good thing or a bad thing.
I think it would be good, as the Party would be forced to split, we could listen to the socialist view and the "liberal" view....we would have a debate that has been missing for thirty years.

Electing a "Blairite" party will prove nothing it will simply be a case of changing the labels. What does electability matter if the party membership disagrees with the policies?

The job of the Party is to reflect the views of its membership, it is then up to the country to accept or reject.

A Party which tailors its views simply to make itself electable is not worth voting for.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: GUEST,achmelvich
Date: 18 Aug 15 - 11:08 AM

so i take it that no -one is able to give any coherent defence of the current government's policies then. you would think their supporters would be happy to bother with insulting opponents. a

anyway, i think i'll just pop back to the gaughan forum - sadly fewer contributions, but none of the sort of rubbish we find too often on here

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: GUEST,Musket
Date: 18 Aug 15 - 12:04 PM

Grammatical correction to the last post but one.

It is either "socialist" or "liberal" or it is socialist or liberal. It isn't socialist or "liberal."

Dick Gaughan eh? Fine guitarist and wonderful singer but daft as a brush when it comes to politics. Mind you, a few years ago when arguing the toss with him over a drink when we booked him, he made my day by saying "If the English want their independence, let them have it."

Achmelvich, it isn't a case of insulting opponents of any camp, it's the blind bollocks from either side. Bridge and Terribulus are poles apart but exuding the same level of intelligence in their posts, which if nothing else is entertaining, but take either of the buggers seriously?

Corbyn is, in my opinion, a useful wake up for politics and cracks the consensus in Westminster down the middle, so a few years with him at the despatch box might be a good thing for the country, but if the reason for the Parliamentary Labour Party existing is to convince the electorate they are fit to govern, they're buggered. Cooper acknowledges aspiration, Burnham can be pragmatic but neither are statesmen, neither have a clear vision, and through curiosity, I have read their stances.

Corbyn has nothing to offer the twenty first century and globalisation of economies. The thing is, most on here are too old to recognise that. They think government is something to do with Westminster and parochialism. Fine, have social policies for spending GDP within The UK, but thinking you can dictate national wealth? Err.. In case you didn't notice, it is our international standing that prevents us being Greece, not our stewardship of The Elgin Marbles. We don't have an empire, we have trade and cooperation.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: GUEST,Frankenstein's Dad
Date: 18 Aug 15 - 12:47 PM

MGM·Lion. Why don't you go your doctor and ask him to change your course of pills? The ones you are on at the moment are obviously doing you no good at all.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 18 Aug 15 - 12:48 PM

You see? There you go again, Myer. Holding Murdoch's "serious" paper as if it were free of bias shows your blindness. It is an irrefutable fact that the Mail has historically been antisemitic, and I don't expect you to agree with that - since you have previously told us that you are Jewish although no longer religious. Your problem is what (apart, apparently, from entering your second childhood)?

It is also obvious (save to those wilfully blind) that the vast majority of the UK media pump right-wing propaganda. Survey after survey has shown that (as a result) the man or woman in the street vastly overestimates the cost of unemployment benefit, the rate of fraud in benefits claims, the number of Muslims in the country. You ought, given your huge conceit, to be an opponent of press bias, but it seems you are not. I suppose given your history here I am not surprised, but it is inconsistent with your own view that your ideals are lofty.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 18 Aug 15 - 01:32 PM

MR Myer to you, Bridgibumz. Didn't read the rest of it, as have given up reading your posts. Not enough of my life remains to make doing so the least bit worthwhile.

☹☹☹☹☹☹

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 18 Aug 15 - 02:13 PM

Is there anything quite so pathetically contemptible, incidentally, as nonentities who post meaninglessly offensive entries hiding behind fatuous pseudonyms like Dracula's Father or whatever it was? Mods should surely delete their piddling little anonymous posts forthwith. Still, perhaps it provides some excitement to their poor circumscribed little existences, so maybe we should be charitable if that's the way they choose to get their kicks.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 18 Aug 15 - 02:49 PM

Read and learn, Myer.

https://www.facebook.com/414021102034635/photos/a.426000677503344.1073741826.414021102034635/620662544703822/?type=1&theater

Oh, sorry, you don't want to learn do you?

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 18 Aug 15 - 04:55 PM

☞☹☜

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 18 Aug 15 - 07:42 PM

I wouldn't call MGM Lion isn't a particularly ridiculous pseudonym, but it is, for all that, a pseudonym.
.......
I wish people would stop talking about the Tory victory as if it had been an overwhelming landslide. They scraped a narrow majority by picking up seats made available by a LibDem collapse, which had been brought about by entangling them in a coalition.

The only part of the UK where there was a landskide was Scotland, where a party significantly to the left of the current Labour Party took nearly every seat.

In England, though Labour did badly, their actual vote rose rather more than the Tory vote did.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 18 Aug 15 - 07:42 PM

I wouldn't call MGM Lion a particularly ridiculous pseudonym, but it is, for all that, a pseudonym.
.......
I wish people would stop talking about the Tory victory as if it had been an overwhelming landslide. They scraped a narrow majority by picking up seats made available by a LibDem collapse, which had been brought about by entangling them in a coalition.

The only part of the UK where there was a landslide was Scotland, where a party significantly to the left of the current Labour Party took nearly every seat.

In England, though Labour did badly, their actual vote rose rather more than the Tory vote did.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: GUEST,Musket Musket
Date: 19 Aug 15 - 03:12 AM

🎶Little Sir Echo how do you do? 🎶

Annoying, isn't it Kevin. We heard you the first time.

As Bridge missed his chance at Michael, I'll say it for him. "It's Mr Bridgibumz to you."

I have to admit, I do try to wind Michael up myself at times. The alternative is to take him seriously and that would never do. When he was on one of his xenophobic rants a while ago, I said "but the nice man down the road in the shop is a Muslim too." To which Michael pointed out that he might be nice but he might also have a nephew who isn't.

So you see, you either see Michael as no different to many Germans in the '20s and '30s or you dismiss him with a smile and put it down to age and senility.

Ready?


Nurse! He's out of bed again!

(Mind you, in one of his earlier posts here he does make a valid point that the country has moved on from visions such as Corbyn's. But then went on to ruin it with the rest of his diatribe.)

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 19 Aug 15 - 03:26 AM

Dear me, all this agonising about poor ickle old me! Rather flattering, really. Thank you Mr Popgun, & all. I expect somebody out there even luvs old Mr Bridgititz, at that.

Hey-ho. Back·2·bed. Can't stay up too long at my gr8 age, yerno!

〠〠〠〠〠

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 19 Aug 15 - 03:32 AM

Not that I have the slightest idea what you mean about the Germans in the 20s & 30s, but don't trouble to explain. I really don't give a flying one what a confused harmless little pestiferous heap of wotsit like you might think about anything...

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 19 Aug 15 - 03:35 AM

& now, must stop, or poor old McG might suffer distress, poor little fellow

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: akenaton
Date: 19 Aug 15 - 03:44 AM

What does the above abusive post add to the discussion?

We all make double posts, anyone who is simply here to make obscure posts, wind people up and indulge in ageist insults is of little value.   It is true that the older we get, the less sure we are in pressing the correct keys or navigating the board. That does not mean that there is anything deficient in our reasoning faculties.
Some here seem to lack any of those?

Mr McGrath, I'm sure the Labour Party would be more electable with one of the "Blairites" as leader, but would another four years of new labour really move society forward? I think socialists must resign themselves to the long haul, starting with an attempt to explain and implement socialist values in society.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: GUEST,Dave
Date: 19 Aug 15 - 03:45 AM

The press of course paint a picture of a crushing defeat for Labour, and the result was disappointing, that true. But it was closer than the right-wing cheerleaders would have you think. The tories were elected to government by 24% of the electorate. The rest either voted Labour, voted for another broadly left party, voted for UKIP for reasons best known to themselves, or didn't vote at all. It is this 76% that the new Labour leader must target, making it clear that the consequences of a tory government are overwhelmingly negative for them. And actually for about 23% of the 24% who did vote for the tories, but thats incidental, the real target must be protest voters and non-voters. To me, it seems that only Corbyn addresses these people.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: akenaton
Date: 19 Aug 15 - 04:09 AM

Getting back to Mrs Thatcher for a moment, people here talk about the destruction of British manufacturing, as if this was a policy brought in to break the "working class", a diabolical right wing conspiracy.

We all know that our manufacturing industries and production of useable resources had become uncompetitive under globalism, they had to be shut down or nationalised and no government of right or left would have had the balls to undertake that task, with its enormous effects on society. It would have meant the ditching of the capitalist system and lower living standards for a spoiled middle class. The rich would be screaming and their middle class supporters would have sabotaged any attempt at change.

Mrs Thatcher was a supreme capitalist politician, her "right to buy scheme" was a political masterstroke.....there are still people who make their living from it, while poor people remain homeless.
She bought another forty years for the system, are we going to allow the "Blairites" to buy another forty?

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 19 Aug 15 - 05:17 AM

some members of my family voted for lib dem and were pissed off to find they had voted tory in the election before last. n fact the liberals used to be quite strong in south west, but they've lost out big time.

seems like the tories are going to be in power for evermore.

Blair should have reformed the electoral system to avoid the Thatcher syndrome. Thatcher ruled and served her little cabal of tame constituencies and sent the rest of the country to hell.

Cameron has an even smaller moral right to be screwing up the country.

the fault lies with Blair. he could have changed things - he didn't. hard to believe that the answer lies with another Blairite government.
a lib dem/ labour compact with the primary concern of electoral reform is the only real hope to deliver us from these extremist governments.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: akenaton
Date: 19 Aug 15 - 05:29 AM

Al...if the Labour Party split, surely PR cant be far off?

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: The Sandman
Date: 19 Aug 15 - 05:36 AM

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: MGM·Lion - PM
Date: 18 Aug 15 - 03:56 AM

I don't "presume to speak for the British people", Jim. It is the bits of paper they put in the ballot box that do that. Can you really not get into your head that it is their votes that demonstrate beyond argument that it is they, not just me, who don't want the doctrinaire bullying of all you lefty lot?

And it's a bit behind the fair to go on parroting "ThatcherThatcherThatcher" as if that were any sort of useful contribution to any sort of debate at this time of day. In case you hadn't noticed, she is as dead as Queen Anne.

Regards as ever

≈M≈
it is not so simple Mike, it is not just their votes but it is also the system of voting,plus rearrangements of election districts [gerrymandering] that have contributed to election results.

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≈

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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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 - 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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 - 10:10 AM

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

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: GUEST
Date: 19 Aug 15 - 10:24 AM

Stop blaming the wrong bogey man

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: 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: 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: 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: akenaton
Date: 19 Aug 15 - 02:21 PM

:0)

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 - 02:27 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: 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: 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 - 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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 - 06:57 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 - 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: 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: 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: 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,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,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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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,Dave
Date: 20 Aug 15 - 09:05 AM

Jim, there is universal franchise in Northern Ireland. Nobody is given the right to govern because of their religion.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 20 Aug 15 - 09:06 AM

"In what sense was Ireland "still reeling from the results of the Famine?""
Ladlordism had left huge numbers of tenants landless, and in most cases, homeless
The land disturbances, due to the fact that the break-up of the old landed estates, were largely benefiting the already wealthy farmers, the poorer ones being more or less ignored, officially ended in 1909, but continued much later in the impoverished west.
Rural Ireland was in a mess under British rule as it had served as "England's Breadbasket" and that is how the rural economy had been developed.
Ireland also inherited from British rule the problems of unemployment, emigration, uneven geographical development and lack of a native industrial base.
Industrial developed in the Northern Counties which Britain retained as part of the United Kingdom - that was the legacy of Empire as it was in all the former colonies.
"What choice?"
I've given the choice - are you suggesting that any country should submit to religion-driven bullies?
The treaty was signed under the threat of, should it be refused, Britain would invade.
If Lloyd George, who made the threat, was prepared to send troops to secure a treaty, then he should have been prepared to send troops to defend any treaty that was signed.
The treaty was signed to favour a Loyalist minority because the minority supported British policy.
Britain sent in armed thugs in the form of the Auxiliaries and the Black and Tans, to ascertain that they got the best deal in whatever treaty was signed
The signing of the enforced treaty has been the cause of the spilling of more blood that would ever have been shed if the Loyalists had taken up arms - and that blood is still being split nearly a century later
The latest concern in the North is the massive drain on the British taxpayer in order to police the on-going sectarian marches.
You are an ultra-nationalist, and well known to be one - and I didn't misunderstand you, whatever you might adapt it to since you said it, you wrote "The policy was to place as many people as possible on the side they would choose."
Fairly unequivocal.
Unless you have anything new to add, I think we're done here.
The days of Empire are over - they were on their last legs when the treaty was signed, yet Britain retained six counties, which it still holds.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 20 Aug 15 - 09:32 AM

You misunderstood me.
I was saying that the borders were chosen to leave as many as possible on the correct side.
I am sorry if my wording was ambiguous but I had already stated, "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."

I do not accept your version of that history.
If it was true, would hundreds of thousands of young Irishmen, all volunteers, have fought for Britain?
Compare that to the number of rebels.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 20 Aug 15 - 09:53 AM

From "History Ireland" by Michael Laffan, head of the School of History in University College Dublin.
No mention of any invasion threat.

it was agreed that a boundary commission would decide the border between the two parts of Ireland. It is significant that the treaty split centred on questions of sovereignty and the oath of fidelity ('allegiance') to the king rather than on the question of partition. Few Dáil deputies discussed the matter. Either they felt that partition was already an established fact and that nothing could be done, or they assumed that the boundary commission clause would take care of the question. Some people were later embarrassed by this omission and tried to rewrite the record.


The treaty was supported by narrow majorities in the Irish cabinet and the Dáil, and in January 1922 Collins formed a provisional government. De Valera went into opposition, but the strongest opposition to the treaty came not from politicians but from elements in the IRA. Some soldiers were unwilling to accept civilian authority. Despite elections in June 1922, which revealed the popularity of the treaty (78 per cent of the first-preference votes were for candidates who supported it), civil war broke out soon afterwards.


The resulting struggle degenerated into a bloodier and more savage conflict than the recent war against the British, and both sides resorted to atrocities. But there was no swing of opinion against the government as had happened after 1916 and in 1919–21, and ultimately the republicans laid down their arms.


The civil war also ended southern concern with Northern Ireland and it brought to an end Collins's attempts to destabilise Craig's government in Belfast.


The civil war was only one factor among several that allowed time to elapse before the boundary commission was established, and not until late 1925 was it ready to complete its report. The chairman (South African jurist Richard Feetham, who was appointed by the British government) had the casting vote, and predictably he took a conservative and narrowly legal view of the changes that might be made to the border. Despite the hopes of the Irish delegation in the treaty negotiations, and despite the fact that one third of the population of Northern Ireland wished to join the Free State, the proposed amendments were minimal. To the shock of nationalists, it was even suggested that the Free State should hand over some of its territory. Ultimately the three governments decided that the border between North and South would remain unchanged.
http://www.historyireland.com/20th-century-contemporary-history/the-emergence-of-the-two-irelands-1912-25/

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 20 Aug 15 - 10:02 AM

"...would hundreds of thousands of young Irishmen, all volunteers, have fought for Britain"

To suggest that that means they accepted Partition is an oversimplification, bordering on libel. It'd make my father spin in his grave. He fought as a Republican in the Civil War, and yet when the World War came, he joined the British Army. "I always believed in standing up for the rights of small countries, even my own" was the reason he gave when he was asked why. And he certainly came anywhere near accepting the partition of Ireland as justified.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 20 Aug 15 - 10:09 AM

But I really think it would be better not to continue with this issue in this thread about the labour leadership election. That's still a lot happening around that, and more to come. Start another thread maybe to talk about Partition.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 20 Aug 15 - 10:59 AM

"No mention of any invasion threat."
You've been given this information before - Lloyd George's threat was as unequivocal as was your statement about Irish people being given the opportunity to choose where to live (only, more grounded in fact.)
If you think I'm going to enter into another farce with you presenting historians you have scooped up off the net and don't have the interest to have read, you really are out of your mind.
Below is the actual quote from Lloyd George making that threat.
That he was capable of carrying it out was obvious by his readiness to send in armed thugs prior to the treaty negotiations.
"Start another thread maybe to talk about Partition."
I have no intention of doing so, nor do I have any intention of cluttering up this discussion to be part of allowing Keith to embark on yet another flight of fantasy - I'm done - my apologies Mac
Jim Carroll
   

"We have gone through this document and met you fairly. ' said Lloyd George when he returned. "Are you now prepared to stand by this Agreement whichever choice Ulster makes? " Griffith agreed. But his was a lone voice.
Lloyd George exerted pressure: "Is it a bargain between Sinn Fein and the British Government? I have to communicate with Sir James Craig tonight. Here are the alternative letters which I have prepared, one enclosing the Articles of Agreement reached by His Majesty's Government and yourselves, the other telling Sir James Craig that the Sinn Fein representatives refuse allegiance and refuse to come within the Empire, and that I have therefore no proposals to make to him. If I send this letter it is war—and war within three days. Which of the two letters am I to send? That is the question you have to decide. "

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 20 Aug 15 - 11:00 AM

Thanks Kevin.
My reference to the volunteering in WW1 was not about acceptance of partition, but to contrast with Jim's description of the prevailing view and of Ireland "still reeling from the famine."

I do not know why Jim raised the issue here, and he has said he has finished now.

An eminent historian writing in a prestigious Irish history journal refutes Jim's view of the partition anyway, so I am done too.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 20 Aug 15 - 11:02 AM

Jim, you have presented all that stuff before.
Teribus showed it was not genuine.

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

I'd rather hear the candidates give their views on running the economy, priorities for inward investment and the social programme they envisage.

Their view on Cromwell, Lloyd George, Paisley or Sands is something most voters would sit cross legged at the feet of Keith's sage historians to know about. Then realise it has fuck all to do with c21 government.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 20 Aug 15 - 11:46 AM

"Teribus showed it was not genuine."
Piss off Keith - it's over - again
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 20 Aug 15 - 11:52 AM

"Teribus showed it was not genuine."
NOW WILL YOU PISS OFF?
"In the course of the negotiations Griffith, and then the other delegates, were persuaded to accept the
proposal for a Boundary Commission to address the unity issue. Under threat of war – and with the last
minute concession of fiscal autonomy – the delegates signed the Articles of Agreement on 6 December,
which proposed the establishment of an Irish Free State as a self-governing dominion within the British
Commonwealth."

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 20 Aug 15 - 12:05 PM

Well it was in World War Two my father fought in the British Army, years after his active IRA times, but the same would have been true 20 years earlier. For example, Tom Barry, who commanded the Third Cork Brigade of the IRA, and wrote a famous book called Guerrilla Day in Ireland, was a sergeant in the British Army in Mesopotamia during the war. (Southern Iraq, that would be. Not much changes, apart from the names of the countries) His army training came in handy for fighting the British Army later.

And I wasn't particularly suggesting you started up an Irish history thread, Jim, or Keith for that matter. But there's bound to be one up and running before long, so that would perhaps be a better place to discuss these matters.
..........
But getting back to domestic politics. I was looking just now at an interview Jeremy Corbyn gave with the alternative media group novara media. He is remarkably leve-headed and calm, and impressive in a way that I don't think I can remember another politician iin a long time. It's on YouTube.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 20 Aug 15 - 12:10 PM

No Jim.
Your source lacks the prestige of History Ireland and is not written by any historian, but read your quote.
They were agreeing to a Boundary Commission to consider the boundaries, not to any actual boundaries.
The agreement was subsequently refuted anyway, threat or no threat.

In the course of the negotiations Griffith, and then the other delegates, were persuaded to accept the
proposal for a Boundary Commission to address the unity issue. Under threat of war – and with the last
minute concession of fiscal autonomy – the delegates signed the Articles of Agreement on 6 December,
which proposed the establishment of an Irish Free State as a self-governing dominion within the British
Commonwealth.
Subsequently, the Cabinet (on 10 December) and, then, the Dáil itself (on 7 January, 1922) split on the
issue (the Oath of Allegiance being particularly contentious) and by June, 1922, armed conflict had
resumed as the armed forces of the two sides fought in the Civil War.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 20 Aug 15 - 12:30 PM

So far you have had at four sources saying the same thing Keith
"But there's bound to be one up and running before long, so that would perhaps be a better place to discuss these matters."
Thanks for clarifying your point Mac
I have no intention of discussing this or anything further with this obsessive (who doesn't read and isn't interested)
I've made my point and am happy to have forced him to scurry behind his "real historians" again - a long-running joke, or what
I really am not going to nause this up any more than I already have
Job done - yet another farce
Seems Ciorbyn is making all the running - good news, even if it only manages to scare the horses.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: GUEST,Allan Conn
Date: 20 Aug 15 - 12:44 PM

"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."

Surely there was also though a dramatic fall in the Protestant population in the Republic through the 20thC which only started recovering in recent times? It is hard to portray a population group as happily settled and integrated when they near disappeared!

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 20 Aug 15 - 01:09 PM

"Surely there was also though a dramatic fall in the Protestant population in the Republic through the 20thC which only started recovering in recent times?"
No it wasn't - the Protestants in the South have never suffered persecution or discrimination - there are no recorded examples of them having done so - unless you can come up with some.
Considering the decades of persecution undergone by the Catholics in the North, it is understandable that you find that fact. many of the English in the Big Houses (most of them absentee landlords, went home, but that is all.
The pressure against mixed denomination marriages were common before ad after the Treaty, but that was the church - nothing to do with the pele or the politicians - but that pressure was part of Six Counties life from the Protestant church (and from the local communities)
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 20 Aug 15 - 01:21 PM

' no recorded examples'

and who pray, would have recorded these examples?

it wasn't the way i heard it.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 20 Aug 15 - 01:24 PM

"it wasn't the way i heard it."
Then e4ducate us Al
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: GUEST,Allan Conn
Date: 20 Aug 15 - 02:17 PM

I never suggested there was outright persecution but there has to be some explanation for the % falling by about 70% at one point. Everything obviously couldn't have been as rosy as being suggested. Through pressure one way or another within the country people either left or stopped being Protestant. The pressure on children of mixed marriages to be brought up as Catholics being one example. I was just watching a documentary the other day where both Bob Geldof and Sinead O'Connor were bemoaning the overbearing presence of the Catholic church in the Ireland of their youth. I take it non Catholics could well have felt the same. I wouldn't class good and smooth integration as being the same as a group or community being drastically reduced in size. Surely you don't need to become Catholic to integrate with Catholics? Integratation here in the Scottish Borders is real enough. No one cares if you are a Catholic or Protestant! Unlike some other parts of Scotland....

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 20 Aug 15 - 03:03 PM

So far you have had at four sources saying the same thing Keith

No I have not.
Just that piece written by an employee of something called "Professional Development Service For Teachers"!!
That piece does not support your claims anyway.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 20 Aug 15 - 03:08 PM

"Everything obviously couldn't have been as rosy as being suggested. "
Then you'll have examples to the contrary?]"The pressure on children of mixed marriages to be brought up as Catholics being one example."
That's the church and it happens throughout Catholicism - religious interference which applies to all religions, not just Protestants.
It happens in other religions, of course - Muslims, Jews.....
On the other hand, prejudice against Catholics immediately became the order of the day in the six counties and was written into the laws there.
One of the first acts of the new government there was to introduce a law linking the right to vote with property ownership, immediately restricting the rights of large numbers of Catholics to vote - other forms of gerrymandering went on (which brought this subject on to this thread when somebody claimed (cant remember who!!) that gerrymandering did not take place.
"Under successive unionist Prime Ministers from Sir James Craig (later Lord Craigavon) onwards, the unionist establishment practised what is generally considered a policy of discrimination against the nationalist/Catholic minority.
This pattern was firmly established in the case of local government,[12] where gerrymandered ward boundaries rigged local government elections to ensure unionist control of some local councils with nationalist majorities. In a number of cases, most prominently those of the Corporation of (Derry), Londonderry, Omagh Urban District, and Fermanagh County Council, ward boundaries were drawn to place as many Catholics as possible into wards with overwhelming nationalist majorities while other wards were created where unionists had small but secure majorities, maximising unionist representation.
Voting arrangements which gave commercial companies multiple votes according to size, and which restricted the personal franchise to property owners, primary tenants and their spouses (which were ended in England in the 1940s) continued in Northern Ireland until 1969,[13] became increasingly resented. Disputes over local government gerrymandering were at the heart of the civil rights movement in the 1960s.[14]"
Discrimination also too place in other essential areas of existence such as housing and employment
Compared to what was happening in the North, Protestants in the south got off lightly in terms of prejudice.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 20 Aug 15 - 03:17 PM

Did the numbers of Catholics in the North crash like those of Southern Protestants, or did they rise Jim?

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 20 Aug 15 - 03:36 PM

BBC 2012.
The census reveals 48% of the resident population are either Protestant or brought up Protestant, a drop of 5% from the 2001 census.

45% of the resident population are either Catholic or brought up Catholic, an increase of 1%.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-20673534

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 20 Aug 15 - 03:49 PM

over the longer period from 1911 to 1961 the process of religious realignment had continued with the Protestant populations in areas south of the border continuing to fall. This was not balanced by a discernable decline in the Catholic proportions north of the border, on the contrary over this period the Catholic population in the greater Belfast area, specifically in a transect west of the city, increased considerably.
http://www.lancaster.ac.uk/troubledgeogs/chap7.htm

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 20 Aug 15 - 04:05 PM

You have the documented facts of built in prejudice against Catholics in the six counties - how about getting one of your historians to sort out them (just as they have sorted out the use of force in getting the treaty signed!!!!)
Both your links indicate a decline in religious practice in general - not prejudice
The same is happening in Catholicism since clerical about hit the fan - though it' happened much more slowly as Catholics tended to be more devout and more likely to support the church (up to now)
JIm Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 20 Aug 15 - 04:19 PM

May I ask of 'The Jim 'n' Keith Eternal Comedy Revue' what relevance, if any, do the events in Ireland in the 19th and 20th centuries have to the current election process for a new leader of the Labour Party?

None, as far as I'm able to determine.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 20 Aug 15 - 05:35 PM

Maybe it would be best to change the thread title to "Irish partition - the thread formerly known as 'electing a new labour leader'..." Or close it perhaps, so that two new threads could spring up to replace it. The Mudcat as hydra.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: GUEST
Date: 20 Aug 15 - 06:26 PM

This employee of The Professional Development Srrvice for teachers, Keith. They wouldn't happen to be eminent historians perchance?

Perhaps Jim knows something you haven't factored into your dismissal?

😴

There again...

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 20 Aug 15 - 06:35 PM

i can't recollect how i know.its a bit like the business with the thieving eastern europeans that got me called a racist. i just forget stuff. i support no faction in either of these altercations. but i know what i know.

i know you've got that bit of history somewhat wrong Jim.

i will endeavour to sort through my brain to come up with the conclusive proof!

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: GUEST,Shimrod
Date: 21 Aug 15 - 01:54 AM

Remind me again who Jeremy Corbyn is and why we were once interested in him?

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: DMcG
Date: 21 Aug 15 - 02:13 AM

Some of us are; and Andy and Yvette and even Liz. But unfortunately Mudcat is sometimes reminiscent of trying to hold a conversation in a pub while a heavy metal tribute band is playing.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 21 Aug 15 - 03:03 AM

"i know you've got that bit of history somewhat wrong Jim."
Then you should be able to put me right Al - so far your offering unsubstantiated allusion
"have to the current election process for a new leader of the Labour Party?"
It came to this thread when the subject of gerrymandering electoral boundries was defended ("i never happened in Britain"), somebody claimed, and is still claiming.
One of the things Corbyn has been accused of by the sewer press in that he supports Gerry Adams and Irish terrorism, which he doesn't.   
You are right, of course - this subject has no place here, beyond that, but Keith is always good for a bit of light relief, and any opportunity to let him strut his stuff is always good for future reference.
I would be irresposible to overdo this, so let's not lads, waddya say?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 21 Aug 15 - 03:18 AM

I think your memory is somewhat selective, Al. You really need to concentrate on substantiated facts, rather than a vague feeling that you know something, if you hope to convince anyone of anything. The incident you refer to as 'thieving east Europeans' was about you saying that crime increases in areas of high east European immigration whereas the fact is that official statistics show that the reverse is true. I was happy to let it lie but seeing as you have brought it up I think it only fair that the facts of the matter are known.

Now, back to the Keith and Jim show...

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 21 Aug 15 - 04:03 AM

"Now, back to the Keith and Jim show..."
Tsk, tsk Dave.
Eastern "thieving Europeans" - what do they have to do with Jeremy Corbyn? - you'll be accused of being part of the " Keith and Jim show" next!!
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 21 Aug 15 - 04:09 AM

Guest,
This employee of The Professional Development Srrvice for teachers, Keith. They wouldn't happen to be eminent historians perchance?

No Guest.
Historians do not write anonymously and do not preface their work with,
"Note: Every effort has been made to ensure the accuracy of the historical data contained herein.
Any inadvertent errors are regretted."

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 21 Aug 15 - 04:14 AM

no i recollect what i said - Dave -its you whats getting euthymol syndrome.   i said i saw some eastern europeans looting a quid shop in Boston , one owned by an old school friend, who could do nowt about it and thought informint the police was pointless. i said i couldn't remember from five years earlier how i knew they were eastern european. but i knew they were. you said i was a racist, i have never pretended a knowledge of what populations of eastern ruropeans get up to in the general way of things.

i really don't know how i know Jim. i'm puzzled myself. but my Grandad was Irish and a member of the British army - though not serving in Ireland. My family were Dubliners. Catholics.

i suppose its common sense. you have to remember that a lot of the families working for the castle would have been protestant, and once the English army had been chucked out, they would hardly have been flavour of the month. i'm sorry - i'm groping round in my memory for stories told me when iwas akid.

today i bought my wife the same necklace for our anniversary that i bought her last year. strike all i have to say from the record as the ravings of 'one whose evidence cannot be trusted'.

as for the labour party... i don't like the look of any of them. they have my vote - but not my confidence. they're just better than the other lot.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 21 Aug 15 - 04:25 AM

How well have Labour dealt with this leadership issue?
It is a shambles, and does not inspire confidence.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: GUEST,Shimrod
Date: 21 Aug 15 - 04:37 AM

"as for the labour party... i don't like the look of any of them. they have my vote - but not my confidence. they're just better than the other lot."

Hmmm! I suspect that, for many years now, that attitude has been part of the problem. My perception is that, since Blair, they've been only slightly better than the other lot and their (often slavish and thoughtless) supporters have let them get away with it. I would like to advance the hypothesis that there are a lot of similarities between the Labour Party and the Catholic Church (I suspect that it's no coincidence that in Labour's northern strongholds there are often large Catholic populations). Voting Labour often seems to me to be a 'faith thing' rather than a rational decision. I wouldn't be surprised that if Labour politicians were found guilty of buggering choir boys, people would still vote for them!

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: GUEST,Dave
Date: 21 Aug 15 - 04:45 AM

Shimrod, its not a faith thing, its the knowledge that they are the least worst option.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: akenaton
Date: 21 Aug 15 - 04:54 AM

Of course it's a faith thing!!

Anyone who imagines that socialists can run Capitalism must have suspended reason.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 21 Aug 15 - 05:22 AM

OK Al, we will have to agree to disagree. You recollect what you said. I recollect what you wrote. I also recollect you said you were leaving Mudcat but I think the thread has been deleted so there are no facts to back that up with. No point in continuing. Try to remember it was you who brought it up on this thread in the first place.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: GUEST,Shimrod
Date: 21 Aug 15 - 05:50 AM

"Anyone who imagines that socialists can run Capitalism must have suspended reason."

Anyone who believes that capitalists should be allowed to run the world has suspended all reason!

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 21 Aug 15 - 07:12 AM

well of course it rankles being publicly accused of being a racist. perhaps if it is a general way of conducting yourself, it didn't register with you too much.

yes i felt like walking away from mudcat. but in truth it is a place i have a great affection for and it is the best forum in existence for my kind of music. so why should mindless abuse have driven me away.

as for this latest nonsense that i generally abused eastern europeans - this is a complete embroidery on the facts.

as for the L abour party thing.

there is a famous poem called i shall vote Labour by the late Christopher Logue seems appropriate.

I Shall Vote Labour by Christopher Logue


I shall vote labour because
God votes labour
I shall vote labour to protect
the sacred institution of the family
I shall vote labour because
I am a dog
I shall vote labour because Labour tolerates
the traitor Ian Smith
I shall vote labour because
I am on a diet
I shall vote labour because Ringo votes labour
I shall vote labour because
upper class hoorays annoy me in expensive restaurants
I shall vote labour because if I don't
somebody else will

And

I shall vote labour because if one person does it everybody else will be wanting to do it.
I shall vote labour because
my husband looks like Antony Wedgewood Benn
I shall vote labour because I am obedient
I shall vote labour because if I do not vote labour
my balls will drop off.
I shall vote labour because there are too few
cars on the road
I shall vote labour because
Mrs Wilson promised me five pounds if I did
I shall vote labour because I love
Look at Life films
I shall vote labour because
I am a hopeless drug addict
I shall vote labour because
I am a Wincarnis shareholder
I shall vote labour because
I failed to be a dollar millionaire aged three
I shall vote labour because labour will build
More maximum security prisons
I shall vote labour because I want to see
Nureyev and Fonteyne dance in Swansea Civic Centre
I shall vote labour because I want to shop
In a covered precinct stretching from Yeovil to Glasgow
I shall vote labour because I want to rape an air hostess
I shall vote labour because I am a hairdresser
I shall vote labour because
The Queen's Stamp collection is the best in the world
I shall vote labour because
Deep in my heart
I am a conservative

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: GUEST,Dave
Date: 21 Aug 15 - 07:30 AM

Akenaton,

Anyone who imagines that Labour are socialists has been asleep for 30 years. Anybody who believes that capitalism is anything other than a scam to transfer wealth to the already rich is either in denial, or, more likely, in it up to their eyeballs.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 21 Aug 15 - 08:00 AM

It is not a general way, Al. I am half Polish and when the implication is that east Europeans are criminals it rankles me too. Maybe that does not mean anything to you either? Do you remember the point you made by quoting Kipling? 'Single me in barracks don't grow into plaster Saints'. It was because you had said that crime had increased in your locality because of the influx of young east Europeans. It was that comment I considered racist as it is proven that an influx of east Europeans generally lowers the crime rate. If you now say that the increase in crime is not due to the influx of young east Europeans then I owe you an apology. If you were offended by being called a racist then maybe you can see that I was offended by being told we are more prone to commit crimes than other people.

Anyway, it is all water under the bridge and nothing to do with the new Labour leader. If we have both learned something from it, it was a worthwhile discussion. I have learned that you are not a racist and that I need to consider what you have said as not having the obvious meaning. What have you learned?

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: GUEST,Musket
Date: 21 Aug 15 - 08:15 AM

Perhaps some people need to stop using words they don't understand.

The United Kingdom has never since Lloyd George been capitalist and it has never ever been socialist.

It has during the last hundred years under every government pursued wealth through capitalism in order to spend on social agendas.

To a greater or lesser extent. Every employer who awards a pay rise is exhibiting socialism. Every worker who has gone on strike for better pay or conditions is a capitalist.

Sanctimonious bollocks all round.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 21 Aug 15 - 08:46 AM

"It has during the last hundred years under every government pursued wealth through capitalism in order to spend on social agendas. "
What a bizarre way of describing both Capitalism and Socialism
Can't make up m#y mind if you are being serious or satirical
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 21 Aug 15 - 09:06 AM

Historians... do not preface their work with,
"Note: Every effort has been made to ensure the accuracy of the historical data contained herein. Any inadvertent errors are regretted."

Perhaps they should. But I would assume that it is in fact as neccessary for any one making a statement about history, or in fact anything, so perhaps actually saying it is redundant

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 21 Aug 15 - 02:41 PM

i learned i am likely to be attacked on mudcat for speaking from experience.

something i learned when describing an awful experience watching a group of pensioners being tortured at a social occasion by some young traddies determind to show they could play a jig or a reel last well past the causing a headache stage. poor old Diana got really pissed off with me for calling the music garbage. i do miss her.

i wasn't talking about where i live - just my home town, and what everybody i met said to me when i visited it.

and of course this does relate to the labour party. isn't this doctrinaire - lets not talk ill of anyone bollocks, the very reason why everyone from a gang of twats like UKIP to Boris the Walking Fruitcake can steal votes off labour.

in way Corbyn is the flipside of Thatcher. she reckoned all we needed to set us right was give the yobs a clip round the ear, introduce 1952 grammar school curriculum and before long Jim Laker would score a century.
Corbyn wants to renationalise the railway, and before long we'll all be having tea in the refreshments room in Warmington on Sea station.

Its this reluctance to believe what honest decent people tell you that makes the idealism so bloody phoney.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: akenaton
Date: 21 Aug 15 - 04:03 PM

Guest Dave :0). Lots of people here believe Labour are socialists, despite a huge amount of evidence to the contrary.
Shim...the vast majority of people here believe capitalists should rule the world

Which leads me on to Team Musket who have obviously COMPLETELY lost the tiny piece of the plot which was in their possession.
The "trickle down economics" argument has been shown as an absolute fraud by tax avoidance, cutting of tax rates for business, the criminal activities associated with the financial crash and manipulation of interest rates.

Capitalism is a huge Ponzi scheme....the government takes what it is allowed to take in revenue....take too much and capital disappears and reappears as if by magic in a more sympathetic environment.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: GUEST,Fred McCormick
Date: 21 Aug 15 - 04:21 PM

Well don't that damned well beat all. Alun Parry is a Liverpudlian political singer and songwriter. He has just had his application to affiliate to the Labour Party turned down on the grounds that his allegiances are at variance with LP aims and values.

I know Alun Parry well. He is a bloody good songwriter who attacks capitalism, and its attendant ills, relentlessly. He stands up for Palestinians, striking workers, Gay rights, women's rights, migrant workers, travellers, oppressed ethnic minorities, and all the wretched individuals of the earth who get a raw deal from life, just because they happen to be poor or black or the wrong sex, or whatever. In other words, he is exactly the sort of person who a Labour Party, a Labour Party, SHOULD have in its ranks, and would have if it had an ounce of commitment towards the ideals which the founding fathers stood for.

He is not a Labour Party member - in fact he is not a member of any political organisation - but I have never heard him say or sing anything decrying the party, or any of its leading figures.

It is blindingly obvious that the reason why they will not let him affiliate is because they know full well he will vote for Corbyn, and we could never have that. In a free and democratic election, we can't let people vote for someone who might actually rattle a few ivory towers, now can we?

God damn the begrudgers and bureaucrats and careerists and self centred opportunists who have infested the party for the past twenty five years and more.

You can hear some of Alun Parry's work here

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: akenaton
Date: 21 Aug 15 - 04:45 PM

"He stands up for Palestinians, striking workers, Gay rights, women's rights, migrant workers, travellers, oppressed ethnic minorities, and all the wretched individuals of the earth who get a raw deal from life, just because they happen to be poor or black or the wrong sex,"

Come on Fred what have any of the above got to do with the struggle against Capitalism....in fact, migrant workers are helping to fund capitalism....Gay rights? Palestinians? Travellers?... most have no interest in any political system, Oppressed ethnic minorities? We are all fucking oppressed. Minorities and majority
You spread the net too wide and nothing will be achieved.   That is what they want, the leaders of capitalism. Make smoke screens, spread confusion, divide and conquer.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 21 Aug 15 - 08:12 PM

True socialists do not have the tunnel vision that says they are campaigning against capitalism to the exclusion of everything else. True socialists know that gay people, Palestinians, travellers, the poor, black people and people of the wrong sex, and plenty more, are sidelined and victimised by the lousy ethos of capitalism, and that only true socialists will ever stand up for them. If those sidelined minorities show no interest in any political system, it's because every political system they've encountered has treated them as fifth-class non-citizens. Your attitude towards such people is as far removed from any notion of true socialism that I've ever encountered. Shame on you.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 21 Aug 15 - 08:15 PM

well that's just the problem. The Labour Party was founded in a very different age.

we had an empire then, and all the racist shit that went with that. homosexuality was illegal. capital and corporal punishment were on the statute books. Ireland was part of the UK.

And I imagine most Labour Party members at the time would have gone along with all that.

whatever founded the Labour Party. I don't think it gets us very far in this debate.

the question is, which of these turkeys will fly?

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 21 Aug 15 - 08:45 PM

The daft thing is that with the alternative voting system that was voted down (by the tiny percentage of people who actually voted in the referendum) it can be taken as read that the votes of virtually all these "leftwing infiltrators" would have ended up in the pile of Labour votes, once second preferences came into play.

In real terms treating such people as "opponents of Labour" is to misrepresent the truth. Whatever the organisational difference, the values are shared, far more I would say than in the case of many of the rightwingers in Labour who claim to be "centre left".

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: GUEST,Musket
Date: 22 Aug 15 - 02:30 AM

Fascinating.

Socialism for me and you, but ignore the rights of others. Spout off oppressing decent normal people whilst claiming to be oppressed yourself. And there was me thinking hypocrisy required intelligence. Mea Culpa.

Capitalism meanwhile is something to do with roofers and other building labourers working cash in hand whilst preaching some weird discredited communism, presumably whilst trying to get rich quick down the dog track.

No wonder telly ratings are down. Far better entertainment viewing the exhibits on Mudcat.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: GUEST,Musket II
Date: 22 Aug 15 - 03:01 AM

Anyone thinking any national government can impose its political philosophy, regardless of what that philosophy is should take note of the fact that Greece is about to have yet another election because slowly but surely, it just might sink in that the job of a national government is to do its best given the international arena it depends on.

What we call socialism is merely ensuring a safety net and effective health and social care plan. We, like every country there is, depend on capitalism to fund it. Everything else is just ensuring either you (capitalism) or everybody (socialism) gets a good long suck on the tit.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: GUEST,Shimrod
Date: 22 Aug 15 - 03:43 AM

Of course, both capitalism and socialism are based on the ludicrous and deadly assumptions that the Earth's resources are purely for human consumption, are infinite in extent and can be consumed forever at ever- accelerating rates. All of the major political parties in the UK (and elsewhere) appear to share these assumptions and, hence, in the opening years of the 21st century, have no credibility whatsoever! Notice how even Jeremy Corbyn puts the now obligatory 'tick' in the 'environment box' but it's at the bottom of his list of priorities and is probably just vaguely aspirational ("under ideal economic conditions we might start to think about the state of the environment ... possibly ...").

But it may already be too late. I strongly suspect that anthropogenic climate change is already much more advanced than we are being told by the media. We're also in the midst of a mass extinction event which I can see happening, with my own eyes, in my own patch. Even if it were remotely possible, do our politicians even have time to ditch their 19th century ideologies? I suspect not. The struggles between Left and Right will soon be consigned to the history books - but there will be no-one around to read (or, indeed, write) the history books!

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: GUEST,Fred McCormick
Date: 22 Aug 15 - 05:18 AM

Steve Shaw. Hear, bloody hear. In one sense the problem doesn't lie with capitalism. The problem lies with the dog eat dog ethos which capitalism lives by, and which disadvantages all but the tiny majority at the top of the tree.

If you'll excuse me I'm off to Whitby, where the spirit of voluntary co-operation, with everyone striving for the common good of the festival, might just serve as a metaphor for a future socialist society - one where people will be more interested more interested in working for the betterment of their fellow human beings (and the planet) than they are in the profit motive and 'what's in it for me'.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: GUEST,Musket
Date: 22 Aug 15 - 07:10 AM

Bad news Fred. I'm at Whitby right now and sod the common good. I'll barge my way to the front of the queue at the bar in The Plough in ten mins if it's all the same to you.

Hate to disappoint you, but my three grand guitar looks positively shabby at the side of some at a singaround last night. Seems we capitalists like the noise folk music makes after all.

🐷💰

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: akenaton
Date: 22 Aug 15 - 07:41 AM

So Steve, you don't want any serious attempt to establish a socialist state?..... I'm afraid there is no other way people must be made to understand that as Shimrod says our natural resources and environment will not withstand another fifty years of capitalism.....no matter who is managing it.

Singing songs is all very nice and cosy, but how many mindsets are changed?.....Society is more self centred and capitalistic today than it has ever been in my lifetime.

If you don't want to be sneered at by people like Musket, start concentrating on the important things, the things which will change the political climate.

Shim says it is already to late, I hope he is wrong as nature has wonderful powers of recovery, but I fear he may be right.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 22 Aug 15 - 07:56 AM

Musket lets me know if I'm wrong without sneering. Watch and learn.

Socialism is inclusive. That means, among other things, celebrating diversity and difference. Note that I said celebrate, not tolerate. Your attitude to gay people and immigrants shows that you feet aren't even on the bottom of the ladder of tolerance, let alone celebration. I've yet to see a single aspect orf silo idioms in anything you've ever posted.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: GUEST
Date: 22 Aug 15 - 08:11 AM

Socialism is inclusive. That means, among other things, celebrating diversity and difference.

What utter drivel...

As a socialist, if you tell me that you're gay, I'll say fine. I won't clap my hands, dance a jig or celebrate it in any way. It's just how it is.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 22 Aug 15 - 08:19 AM

It doesn't much matter what a guitar looks like, what matters is how it sounds, and that's more down to how it's played. I've heard brilliant music on instruments that look like wreckks, and the other way round.

Pushing your way to the bar isn't about capitalism. Individual jostling and competing is a whole different game from organised exploitation. If you were to buy up all the beer in the pub, and sell it to the punters for a tidy profit, that would be capitalism.

As for what counts as socialist values, I think it has to be recognised that that is primarily about economic things. The other things, like opposition to fox-hunting, and to the death penalty, and prison reform and gender issues can in principle all be signed up to by rightwing Tories, and often are. The economic issues are the central ones of which that can't be said.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 22 Aug 15 - 08:23 AM

Aspect of socialism, that should have said. Silo idioms sounds good. At least my iPad autocorrect thought so!

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 22 Aug 15 - 08:25 AM

Well done for completely missing the point, Guest.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: GUEST
Date: 22 Aug 15 - 08:40 AM

And what was the point that I'm missing?

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 22 Aug 15 - 08:47 AM

I agree, Kevin, but surely true socialism has a significant humanitarian side to it as well. One thing that Jeremy Corbyn's inclusion in the contest is doing is getting Labour to rethink the fuzzy, almost invisible line that, thanks to Blair, separates Labour from Tory. The way we see each other as fellow human beings, in spite of difference, is part of that rethink, hopefully. Working people do not exist simply to be exploited by the rich and powerful and we have an obligation to treat people who can't earn enough, or who seek safety in this country, with fairness and humanity. Not indulgence...

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: akenaton
Date: 22 Aug 15 - 09:51 AM

People create the humanitarian side!......given the correct environment. Some thing which are beneficial will be encouraged, some things which are not will be discouraged.

Fidel Castro was encouraging a socialist state and socialist mindset in Cuba......against all the odds.....but it takes a fist of steel, and an inspirational leader.

No "liberal" liked what Fidel did, they screamed and shouted about all the minutia, but the state still exists, with a good education and health service, the lowest HIV figures in the world... and will until the corporate capitalists get their foot back in the door.

Fidel is old and frail, but he still doesn't trust US politicians.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: GUEST,Musket
Date: 22 Aug 15 - 09:54 AM

Say what you like. The beer was great, the music tolerable and now off for a dump and some kip. Playing tonight and got to look my capitalist best.

Barging in possibly increased my beer consumption and therefore added contribution to GDP by three pints. Got to do your bit for the economy eh?

Nobody has to be shown that socialism is the way forward same as nobody had to be shown capitalism is the way forward. We vote, we accept the outcome and that is that.

Now, the hotel is that way, I think? Touching cloth here...

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: akenaton
Date: 22 Aug 15 - 10:02 AM

No disrespect intended, but I wish to god we had a Fidel Castro rather than a Jeremy Corbyn.

Maybe Jeremy has a fist of steel inside the pure new wool gloves :0)


Come on Jeremy!!

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: GUEST,Musket
Date: 22 Aug 15 - 12:49 PM

Fuck me drunk. Despotic dictators who keep their citizens in fear of their lives and forty years behind the rest of the world are suddenly idolised by someone who sees sections of society as second class.

Nothing new there.

By the way, the HIV rates in Cuba cannot be measured as public health monitoring is selective. WHO publish their concerns regularly, and Cuban doctors who make use of the relationship with South Africa as a way of escaping the regime tend to publish all about it in BMJ.

That said, their training is good as far as it goes,but tends to be woefully out of date, so in order to work here or indeed to be on the specialist register in South Africa, it takes two years of a structured course in recent techniques and procedures in their speciality.

On other matters, I have been to Cuba three times on business and the grinding poverty away from the tourist areas are a stain on the whole rotten Castro regime. They saved the country from the worst excesses of USA business and replaced it with something worse.

Corbyn says nice things about him though...

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 22 Aug 15 - 02:32 PM

'As a socialist, if you tell me that you're gay, I'll say fine. I won't clap my hands, dance a jig or celebrate it in any way. It's just how it is'

oh go on! dance a jig! you'd look look great in one of those little riverdance skirts, and panties to match your moustache....

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 22 Aug 15 - 04:26 PM

I've yet to see a single aspect orf silo idioms in anything..."

Give us a clue what that means, Steve.
..............
Yes, there's a humanitarian tradition that fits well with the socialist analysis, but my point was, the fact that it's been particularly associated with the left and centre rather than more right-wing analyses in our corner of the world is contingent. There's nothing inevitable about it. Economic conservatives can hold all kinds of liberal views, and still remain profoundly conservative (though that's not the right word really - very few of them appear to have the distrust of change in Society that the term implies when it comes to changes that damage the lives of poor people).

But even when formally sharing the same liberal values, these get applied in a different way. Conservative feminists will focus on the fact that there aren't many top executives who are women, socialist feminists will have the plight of cleaners and call centre workers and single mothers as their focus.

It's this focus on economic issues, and the appetite for equality that defines socialism, not the liberal values that can be shared at some level across the political spectrum.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 22 Aug 15 - 05:12 PM

I did post a correction to that glitch.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: akenaton
Date: 22 Aug 15 - 06:29 PM

In my youth we had a society which contained large elements of socialism ....we were poor, but we never felt it to be "grinding poverty". We had self sufficiency, people repaired things themselves or sent them off to be repaired, people rode bicycles, helped their neighbours in what we would now call work sharing, but most importantly there was no huge wealth differentials between professional people and manual labourers...no one was rich, not the doctors, farmers, shopkeepers even the "aristocracy" who were crippled by "death taxes"
In times of extreme need people shared what they had, merchants wrote off food bills. My own family was left penniless and homeless by fire .....the little community rallied round, gave what they could and we survived ....I often worked free of charge to folks whom I knew to be in dire straights financially.

We need to learn well what Shimrod says capitalism is no longer sustainable.....we all have to get used to being rather a lot poorer and if we are not willing to accept that, then we must be made to accept it.

In saying that, we must make sure that everyone contributes and that their contributions are recognised.....Monolithic industrial socialism failed because it did not take into account humanity's desire to have a purpose and to be respected for fulfilling that purpose.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: akenaton
Date: 22 Aug 15 - 06:36 PM

On Fidel Castro,.....he of the "rotten regime", when the great man dies, there will be no singing and dancing in the streets of Havana.

I predict the biggest show of REAL emotion from the Cuban people.
A country will mourn the death of their father.

Fortunately he leaves a template of how a sustainable society should work and without US sanctions he could have done much much more.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: GUEST
Date: 22 Aug 15 - 07:04 PM

"without US sanctions he could have done much much more."

He received all the largess he needed from the Soviets, he didn't need the US.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 22 Aug 15 - 07:54 PM

We appear to have entered some kind of golden-age dream world...

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: GUEST,achmelvich
Date: 22 Aug 15 - 07:55 PM

https://keithpp.wordpress.com/tag/liz-kendall/

all seems fair enough to me

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 22 Aug 15 - 08:19 PM

Without the sanctions imposed by the US against Cuba, which other countries were forced largely to join in, Cuba wouldn't have needed to rely on help from the Soviet Union, which came at a stiff political price, and of course dried up over 20 years ago.

Pretty well all the aspects of a war economy forced on Cuba for so long can be paralleled by what happened in the UK during the war years, which was every bit as much a "dictatorship" as Cuba, for essentially the same reasons.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: GUEST
Date: 23 Aug 15 - 02:58 AM

We can and no doubt will argue about Corbyn's economic and leftileaning views. But I think there is another force playing that is rarely discussed and when it is it is entirely negatively in terms of rebellion against the whip. It is his refusal to play politics as a game, rather than something that matters. For example, it is claimed the Tories have a series of announcements planned for just after September 12 to force whoever is elected to appear as extrem lefty or Tory-light depending how whoever is elected responds. That's playing playground level PR games: your focus should be on how these policies affect real people in the real world, not whether it makes your opponents stronger or weaker. That's the game Jeremy rejects, and it would be better for the country if politicians on both sides also started thinking more about effect on lives than the PR.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: DMcG
Date: 23 Aug 15 - 03:04 AM

Me again above.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: Musket
Date: 23 Aug 15 - 03:07 AM

Oh gosh. Just think, if the USA hadn't imposed sanctions, perhaps Castro wouldn't have had to liquidate opposition leaders, refuse passports and exit papers for Cubans, spend a large proportion of GDP on a secret police function to keep people in check, suspend any means of democracy (usually from a beam in Havana Prison) and use starvation rations as a political tool.

zzzzzz

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: akenaton
Date: 23 Aug 15 - 05:39 AM

Opposition leaders? :0)....Do you mean supporters of Batista?

When are "YOU PEOPLE" going to see that being "nice and liberal" does not work when attempting to change society.

"democracy" and "liberalism" under this system, are devices to ensure that change does NOT take place, not to facilitate it.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: akenaton
Date: 23 Aug 15 - 06:56 AM

Shock Horror...."The Labour Party is being infiltrated by socialists!!!!"

Apparently many members are being banned from voting if they have criticised the Party on Facebook or Twitter......wonder if Mudcat counts?

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: GUEST,Musket
Date: 23 Aug 15 - 07:12 AM

Nobody is trying to change you. Although many wish you'd stop embarrassing yourself and polluting debate.

"Apparently many members are being banned .... If they have criticised....."

Err.. That isn't true, is it? Did you make it up or is it on the same far right websites where you get your "facts" to support your bigotry, homophobia and puerile hatred that makes anybody cringe, and especially those who see themselves as socialists?

Batista? Castro was his opposition, he wasn't around to be opposition to the Castro regime. At least get a neighbour to read some history to you. Even Wikipedia for Clapton's sake..

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 23 Aug 15 - 11:02 AM

Many of those things you cite Musket, have close paralells in how the wartime government in the UK behaved, or to go further back, the Paris Commune. When a country, or a city, is under siege, many civil liberties go to the wall, and inevitably things happen that shouldn't happen.

But if America had accepted the right of Cubans to make their own revolution, without trying to overhrow it directly, and then trying to starve it out, there would have been no occasion for Cuba to operate as if it were at war to generations.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: Musket
Date: 23 Aug 15 - 11:22 AM

True. But it did. Cuba did what it did, and only stopped when it's sugar daddy got involved in a messy divorce so had to turn to the civilised world to wipe it's arse. And some fool seems to admire that.

Each to his own, but if he must post bollocks, he must expect intelligent people to squirm and then laugh. I don't laugh at his dim intellect, I laugh because his obscene bigotry is not removed from where unsuspecting normal people may stumble across it and if you don't laugh at the village idiot, what the fuck are you meant to do? Are you married Kevin? Imagine reading about your wife what he puts about my husband and I before leaping to the little shit's defence.

Back to Cuba.

Anybody who admires the fucking place hasn't been. Unless they were in one of the film set reality holiday resorts. My "hotel".... Ever had El Burro Verde before? Those here with a smattering of Spanish might be able to tell what was wrapped in spinach leaves.

And it tasted tough.

And I had to look grateful because it was a rare treat for the locals, if they could afford it. And if they couldn't, they would have been in trouble for telling me so.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: GUEST,Musket
Date: 23 Aug 15 - 11:31 AM

Perhaps Akenaton should join The SNP?

Their members believe liberal policies in a democratic system are the way forward.

"Prosperity through equality."

That's what the good people of Scotland voted for. Id like to think Labour should mean the same but I get confused...

Good post by Musket above. (Looks like he just posted it, I thought he was driving home from Whitby?) I've been to Cuba too, but a good few years before him. I doubt a despotic dictator is a good role model. Corbyn says nice things about him but hopefully if he becomes, as he wishes, Her Majesty's Leader of the Loyal Opposition, he might allow his balls to drop. He has already embraced backing business to kick start the economy and found a few admirers in Bank of England circles.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: akenaton
Date: 23 Aug 15 - 11:42 AM

"
Batista? Castro was his opposition, he wasn't around to be opposition to the Castro regime. At least get a neighbour to read some history to you. Even Wikipedia for Clapton's sake"

His supporters are alive, well and living in Florida.
They would love to see the prostitutes back on the streets, the infant mortality and the Mafioso back in power

Never! while Fidel lives and breathes.

Viva Castro! Viva Cuba!

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: akenaton
Date: 23 Aug 15 - 12:35 PM

I am a member of the SNP and I hope to see Scotland a free Sovereign Nation....that will require withdrawal from NATO and the EU.
Neither of these are Party policy, but without them we will never be truly independent, so I will continue membership.

Meaningless sloganizing ....like "Prosperity through Equality" is of no real value......narrowing the wealth gap can never be achieved under this predatory system.....anything else is simply window dressing

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: GUEST,Musket
Date: 23 Aug 15 - 02:58 PM

If Viz decide to do a shabby lower order version of Major Misunderstanding (Private Prat?) I can send them over to base the character.

Viva Bloodythirty murdering bastard dictator indeed.

You aren't in SNP. They stand for everything you blame for your whole sorry existence.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: akenaton
Date: 23 Aug 15 - 05:01 PM

You haven't a clue what they stand for or what they believe, I've been a member of the SNP for nigh on twenty years, you've been in Scotland 6 weeks :0).....and in another 60years you will never understand the Scots.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 23 Aug 15 - 05:19 PM

What a shame a thread with lots of potential has been lost to the usual mass-debaters...

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: akenaton
Date: 23 Aug 15 - 05:22 PM

Thought you were pals with Team Musket?

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 23 Aug 15 - 05:30 PM

That really is quite funny, ake. Who wrote it for you?

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: Musket
Date: 23 Aug 15 - 06:03 PM

Whoever leads Labour, same as whoever leads SNP, I doubt taking lessons from despotic terrorists is high on their agenda.

I love the bit where he rattles on about why he is a member of SNP then points out the party is opposed to them all 😂

Be fair Dave. It's a bit like going on a serious web page and getting a virus meaning your computer displays porn. If you can't debate, you might as well have a wank, and let's face it, whilst the fantasy merchants on here are spouting off, you can't debate serious matters with them anyway.

Unless someone has a serious reply to Viva Castro, that is.... Cos be buggered if I can without laughing.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 23 Aug 15 - 09:34 PM

Never understand the Scots? Are they aliens or something?

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 24 Aug 15 - 05:34 AM

It seems that the right are rapidly stitching up Britain for themselves in the advent of a Corbyn victory
Whitehall officials are reviewing the practice of allowing the leader of the opposition access to secret intelligence "amid warnings of Jeremy Corbyn's controversial views on foreign policy".
Seems like a good reason why he should be leader of the Labour Party
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: akenaton
Date: 24 Aug 15 - 07:09 AM

Jim, it is not the "right" who are attempting to stop Jeremy being elected, I expect they would delighted to see him as Labour leader.

It should be blindingly obvious who our enemies are....The "Blairite liberals".

I don't think that Jeremy can possibly win a general election, but it is imperative that he is returned as leader if we are to make a start on the job of changing society.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: Musket
Date: 24 Aug 15 - 07:18 AM

You change society by consent of society.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 24 Aug 15 - 08:05 AM

"Jim, it is not the "right" who are attempting to stop"
Yes it is Ake - they are trying to make him electable.
"I expect they would delighted to see him as Labour leader."
I very much doubt that - otherwise, why are right wing rags such as Murdoch's Times and the Daily Wail putting so much effort into making sure he is not?
What you appear to be suggesting is that left-wing policies will never be acceptable to the electorate - in which case, we may as well all piss off and sharpen our scythes, and leave the parliamentarians at it.
"The "Blairite liberals"
I do wish you would stop misusing the term 'Liberal' - it's the last thing you could possible accuse Blair and his acolytes of.
A bit of liberality would make the world a better place.
Definition of Liberal
"willing to respect or accept behaviour or opinions different from one's own; open to new ideas."
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: Musket
Date: 24 Aug 15 - 08:23 AM

You can see from your definition why he puts the word liberal in ""

In a democracy, we are all therefore liberals. If people vote for a system under the rules of the given election, you need a good firm challenging opposition, and Corbyn can do that.

Adopting his alternatives is a very different kettle of fish. His rash comments on using quantitive easing in a growing economy or single stroke nationalisation with no compensation for the poor buggers investing their savings precludes anyone being interested in him getting the keys to No.10 so until he settles down and realises the difference between apathy in today's politicians and support for his ideas, he is on a hiding to nothing.

I still think I would like him leading for two years whilst Labour find themselves again, but a real leader must come forward in that time. Watson? Johnson? Buggered if I know.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 24 Aug 15 - 02:09 PM

I think it's a good principle that, even in a discussion that has degenerated into an argument, we should never post in language that we wouldn't be ready to use when talking face to face with those with whom we are arguing.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: GUEST,Dave
Date: 24 Aug 15 - 03:55 PM

Musket, I don't think Corbyn is talking about "poor buggers". He is talking about rich foreign parasites and city traders. "Poor buggers" don't have the level of savings to speculate on shares.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: GUEST,achmelvich
Date: 24 Aug 15 - 04:06 PM

'watson?johnson?' i saw tom watson talking at maryport and wasn't particularly impressed in terms of his analysis and new labourishness. however, he does seem a decent sort and would probably be an efficient and conscientious organiser - so i voted for him on that basis, with jeremy corbyn to provide the direction and policies. (and hope!)

it may not be jeremy corbyn but maybe some of the more adaptable labour mps will be encouraged to let their more positive instincts lead them to do the job they were elected to do. from them we may find some newish talent emerging to give an invigorated labour movement real confidence to take on the tories.

alan johnson has not been interested in the job before and has made it clear that he doesn't like corbyn (or socialism). he is not the man to take the party forward.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 24 Aug 15 - 08:19 PM

What Corbyn has said about compensation when utilities are returned to a form of public ownership isn't as simple as " no compensation", though the media spins it as that.

What he has said is that where the price at which they were sold was significatly less than the price at which they should have been sold - as notoriously in the case of Royal Mail, and RBS - any price paid to buy them back should take that underpayment into account.

A more likely potential leader than Watson or Johnson might be Dan Jarvis. But it's only too possible that someone we've never heard of might emerge in a Corbyn led administration, which is committed to opening up the tiny closed circle of Labour party politics.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: GUEST,Musket
Date: 25 Aug 15 - 03:02 AM

Investing in shares?

Every pension policy (other than a few state owned ones such as NHS where payments to pensioners is via government coffers) is invested on your behalf in shares. Every penny in your building society passbook is invested in shares. Every penny the government can spend on social security, benefits, NHS, defence, education and state pension is dependent on market confidence in the national debt and competent fiscal management.

So... Who are these people who don't have a stake in the only fucking difference between us and a third world country relying on food parcels?

(Yes Kevin, I would preface my question to him with fucking, face to face. I didn't think lesson 101 in economics needed to be repeated in order to educate. Views are fine and valid, but to think only the top 0.01% are affected by destroying our standing, the only thing we have to offer the bloody world these days...) Our national credit rating is the rubicon that no chancellor of any persuasion has wished to cross.

What price Corbyn's ideas without the funds to put them into action? Take bonuses from anyone in the financial world? They'll pay for Birmingham Social Services for a day or maybe two if you let old people sit in their shit for a few hours. The rest of his ideas?

As I said. I like what he wishes to prioritise spending on to a degree but I see nothing concerning how to fund and maintain it.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 25 Aug 15 - 03:11 AM

It appears from yesterdays news that a new world-wide financial crisis is on the horizon and you can put money on which section of the community will have to bend over and bear the brunt of it - certainly not those who can afford to invest.
The world needs new leaders with new ideas, not more re-arranging of the deckchairs to protect the haves.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: akenaton
Date: 25 Aug 15 - 03:21 AM

For the last few years, savings have been stolen to pay for the destruction caused by the over use of credit.

Credit is always used as a tactic of last resort when a capitalist economy becomes unsustainable.
We must be made to understand that we have been conned. The advance of materialism in our society did not make it better, just made a few rich people richer and closed off the future to our children and grandchildren.
Scotland is full of empty houses used for one month a year by wealthy people who can afford to leave them empty for most of the year.
Buy to lets at huge rents, bought as investments unaffordable to local young people.
We have a housing problem, yet houses lie empty.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: GUEST,HiLo
Date: 25 Aug 15 - 03:25 AM

So Jim , you think that pensIoners who have small investments in order to provide for themselves in later years are the "haves" who won't ba affected ? yours is the politIcs of resentment and it ain't that pretty all.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 25 Aug 15 - 03:41 AM

"So Jim , you think that pensIoners who have small investments in order to provide for themselves in later years are the "haves""
There really is more at stake than that at the present time.
"The poor pensioners" are always dragged out as an excuse for leaving things as they are - crocodile tears.
What about the poor pensioners on the breadline whose spending power is reducing because of corporate greed and bankers over-indulgence - or the people who have lost their homes because of being conned by the capitalist dream - or the near two million on the dole - or the workers who have lost security of employment under this shower of charlatans......
I suggest you look and the rapidly growing gap between the haves and the have nots in Britain today, and then come back and tell us this system is working for the good of us all.
Its not yet more tinkering with a worn-out engine that's needed, but a new car with a new driver travelling in a different direction altogether.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: GUEST,Hilo
Date: 25 Aug 15 - 04:12 AM

There many people of modest means who invest small sums of money. They would be very hard hit by a financial downturn. All ok am saying is that your derision of the called haves wears thin . And I do recognize that live in poverty and we do need to address that. But you can't make poor richer by blaming the people who invest. Capitalism is flawed. It I do not know what alternative is, it seems that any system designed by humans will be flawed.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 25 Aug 15 - 05:55 AM

"There many people of modest means who invest small sums of money."
There are indeed, and they are suffering from the ongoing financial downturns that have become a part of our various economies - one trillion was wiped off the stock-market yesterday.
I have no "derision for these people - that't an invention of those with no argument for the support of the way things are.
These people include members of my family - especially those living in the North of England, which was cut adrift by Mad Maggie Mob - a deafening silence and no attempts to put right what she did - in fact New Labour embraced many of her values.
Just opening the newspaper this morning shows how things are - a large article on how London has become a place where only the well off can afford to live - the classic contradiction of our system wherever there's work, property prices soar beyond the reach of the people needed to fill the jobs.
I grew up in one of the biggest sink estates in Europe - just outside Liverpool - my sisters still live there I was lucky enough to be unattached and could move to follow the work - they couldn't, and remained in one of the unemployment blackspots of Britain.
Let's hear it for them and their situation - or are they people you "deride"?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 25 Aug 15 - 06:16 AM

well said, Jim.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: GUEST,Musket
Date: 25 Aug 15 - 06:28 AM

Not only hear it for them, but be able to do something about them. i.e. Have government income from a buoyant economy that can pay for a social system with a safety net, decent welfare and healthcare and encourage those who can to do and those who can't to not be at the bottom of a heap.

For that, you need to encourage, not deride those with the means to invest.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 25 Aug 15 - 06:42 AM

"For that, you need to encourage, not deride those with the means to invest."
Don't you start repeating distortions Muskie - who is deriding anybody?
Encouraging those at the bottom of the heap to do waht exactly - go and work on their allotments (all gone now)
All you can "encourage" them to do is bend over and take what the present situation has to offer - only producing the opportunity to really change society can put a stop to that
|Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: GUEST,Musket
Date: 25 Aug 15 - 08:54 AM

Sigh

Alternatively, be a whinging ex pat.

You don't change society, you ensure society works.

You are in Ireland, I am in The UK. Yesterday, due to the Chinese government devaluing their currency, both our governments had less money to spend. Today, because the Chinese government cut interest rates, both governments have about 30% of it back.

One reason we wage our fists at politicians is that they are impotent. Westminster used to make decisions that had knock on throughout the world. Parish pump these days...

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 25 Aug 15 - 08:58 AM

interesting...then of course. the fifty dollar question - how would you change society.what changes would you make.

Everything is so different to how things were when I was younger - I don't feel qualified to talk any more.

we we were watching jeremy Kyle the other day. My wife said to me I didn't know any single mothers when we were teenagers. You got a girl in the club, you married her. simple as...

Education, law and order, the health service ...its all almost unrecognisable.

also a lot of these career choices open to us...they were pretty desperate. a complete waste of ones youth. I'm not suggesting all young folks should enrol at Paul Maccartney's college for wannabe superstars.

But maybe this laissez fire sysytem has gone a bit wild and crazy. And the next leader who's any good will actually have some solid ideas on how to improve things for the better for everybody.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 25 Aug 15 - 08:58 AM

interesting...then of course. the fifty dollar question - how would you change society.what changes would you make.

Everything is so different to how things were when I was younger - I don't feel qualified to talk any more.

we we were watching jeremy Kyle the other day. My wife said to me I didn't know any single mothers when we were teenagers. You got a girl in the club, you married her. simple as...

Education, law and order, the health service ...its all almost unrecognisable.

also a lot of these career choices open to us...they were pretty desperate. a complete waste of ones youth. I'm not suggesting all young folks should enrol at Paul Maccartney's college for wannabe superstars.

But maybe this laissez fire sysytem has gone a bit wild and crazy. And the next leader who's any good will actually have some solid ideas on how to improve things for the better for everybody.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 25 Aug 15 - 09:09 AM

"Alternatively, be a whinging ex pat. "
Sigh - the same old, same old insulting to avoid the reality of the situation.
You're not the first one to use the Little Englander, "how dare you insult our Queen and Country, sir" to duck out of an argument.
Maybe a 'passport production' rule should be introduced to these threads.
Give us a break Muskie - you used to be better than that.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: GUEST,HiLo
Date: 25 Aug 15 - 11:29 AM

What is the alternative to Capitalism Jim. I really would like to know. No matter what the system, governments need to generate money in order to pay for social programs. You can't do that by simple income tax, countries must generate wealth in many ways. They need financial credibility in order to do that. And to gain credibility you need investors, both large and small. So I am curious about what the alternative might be.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: GUEST,Musket
Date: 25 Aug 15 - 11:40 AM

You used to address what people write, rather than what you want people to think they wrote.

Little Englander? Where the flying fuck did that come from? It's like me saying I like wine and you saying that beech makes a better hedge though.

Like I said. Again. You can't change society you can only strive to make society work.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 25 Aug 15 - 12:07 PM

"What is the alternative to Capitalism Jim."
Take your pick - you can have Capitalism, Socialism or fascism
Corbyn appears to offer a middle of the road approach to socialism - not world shattering but a move in the right direction
Generating wealth - for whom?
Thatcher kicked the idea of Britain being self-sufficient into touch when she closed down British industry and put us in the hands of bankers and speculators.
What's your solution to the one trillion dropped from yesterday's stock exchange, and the nearly two million unemployed in Britain - Carry on Camping?
I really would like to know
"Little Englander? Where the flying fuck did that come from"
From the "ex par bit - where the flying fuck do you7 think it came from?
What the flying fuck does it matter where I'm living - why bring it into this discussion? - rhetorical question - I know damn well why you brought it up, it's the favourite ploy of one of our friends whenever he finds himself in trouble.   
"You used to address what people write"
You too Muskie - where did I indicate derision?
I'd quite like to know that, as well.
Answers on a postcard please.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: GUEST,HiLo
Date: 25 Aug 15 - 12:55 PM

Those are the choices are they Jim ? What pays for socialism ? I believe in the state providing for people, health, education, benefits, housing. But I also believe that we must pay for it. Socialism does not seem to work, take Greece for example, they keep running out of other peoples money.
Wealth must be generated to run education, the NHS, benefits, pensions and so on. Don't you think ?

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 25 Aug 15 - 01:06 PM

Corbyn has specifically indicated that he values the kind of busines that actually involves real investment. That's not the same as buying up public utilities sold off the back of a lorry by a dodgy government selling it at mates' rates.

The word "capitalism" covers a wide range of ways of organising things. Some are quite compatible with a decent society. Some are toxic.

It's worth noting that Corbyn's suggestions about how the economy could be better run have been quite widely backed by a fair number of well regarded economists, and in fact are a lot more in line with current IMF thinking than George Osborne's. (Though IMF approval isn't necessarily an encomium, it does puncture the story being put around that Corbyn's proposals are so far out from the consensus that they can be dismissed as ridiculous without even being examined.)

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 25 Aug 15 - 02:58 PM

"What pays for socialism ?"
Full employment and an expansion based on genuine needs rather than profit can make any system self-supporting ("real investment" as Mac has just pointed out)- it certainly isn't happening with what we've got; we've just seen a trillion times worth of evidence as proof of that - I assume that you are refusing to respond to this on the grounds that it might incriminate you!
The next thing were quite likely to see is the predators that have dropped us in it will be paying themselves huge bonuses to dig us out of the klarts they've dropped us in - just like they did after the banking fiasco.
I don't suppose you'll respond to this o the same grounds as you've ignored everything else.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: GUEST,Musket
Date: 25 Aug 15 - 03:22 PM

Linking Corbyn to IMF thinking and alienating Osborn from the thinking requires a spot of cherry picking that only media commentators with a mission would employ.

Yes, the overall view that austerity isn't going to give us the recovery we need to address the issues is a valid view that IMF support but it isn't a Corbyn idea. It was Labour manifesto promise by Ed Balls for starters.

I happen to agree with it for what it's worth but IMF require growing economies to fund their own work so don't expect them to support Osborn austerity...,

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 25 Aug 15 - 03:38 PM

The forty academic economists who made that link with IMF thinking and Corbyn's proposals in a letter to the media this week were not "media commentators with a mission". In fact that description is far more applicable to those writing columns and leaders portraying him as a man peddling crazy proposals.

The Labour manifesto made some timid statements in the direction of distancing it down from full blooded austerity, but it remained firmly attached to the principle of maintaining austerity based policies. And since the election there have been serious steps to go back on even those timid statements, especially by tgoe associated with Liz Kendall, which includes Chuka Umunna, Tristram Hjnt - and David Miliband.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: GUEST,Dave
Date: 25 Aug 15 - 05:42 PM

HiLo, Greece has not been in any way a socialist country, they have been subjected to the rampant excesses of crony capitalism, thats why they have run out of money. Rich people not paying their taxes has been the problem. Syriza were not in power until January 2015, and even they, sans Varoufakis, can scarcely be described as socialist.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: GUEST,HiLo
Date: 26 Aug 15 - 01:45 AM

"incriminate yourself" what does that mean ? I am not refusing to answer , I disagree with you. So there is no point going. In circles , as you are sometimes wont to do.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: GUEST,Musket
Date: 26 Aug 15 - 01:46 AM

So there are media commentators without a mission?

You must stop reading The Indescribablyboring. 😆

Meanwhile, Corbyn's clarifications on most of his earlier mouth without responsibility stances at least show him as s professional politician. Hope for the bugger yet.

I do like his idea of women only train carriages. The upshot being carriages with men only. I reckon we might be able to fit in a dartboard and have contests setting light to farts.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 26 Aug 15 - 02:53 AM

"I am not refusing to answer "
Yes you are - what is there to disagree with?
The financial markets around the world have just flushed a trillion's worth of the worlds money down the pan and put the the well-being of the people of a dozen nations in jeapordy and you "disagree" - disagree about what, exactly?
That is the system you are putting forward as preferable.
You appear to regard "people, health, education, benefits, housing" as liabilities to be payed for by "the State" (nuffin' to do wiv the taxes payed in out of hard-earned wages from workers pay-packets, of course, just the good old hard-done-by "State" - whoever that is!)
Yet on the other hand, you find the prospect of a dozen economic crises brought about by a bunch of gamblers playing with the world's money on The Stock Exchange unworthy of comment?
We are just recovering from a recession brought about by bankers on a spend-spend-spend spree, who rewarded themselves with massive bonuses for putting right the mess they got our countries into (their solution to their self-made messes - screw the lesser well-off - nothing new there).
We never got repaid for all the political corruption found to be indulged in by our politicians who were dipping into the nations purses for duck palaces and invented expense claims - not one head rolled in that fiasco.
Offshore accounts, secret Swiss bank accounts, placing companies in the spouse's name to avoid having to pay taxes...... all still common practice, untouched by the law - yet if a worker is found to have been paid undeclared cash for a job, he or she is prosecuted and labelled a parasite.
Or if a youngster fails to find work because there is none, he or she is packed off to a 'Boot Camp'
That is what Corbyn is suggesting needs changing, and doesn't it just make you and yours throw your toys out of your prams.
Time for Edward Gibbon to return and write a sequel - 'The Decline and Fall of the World Economies' maybe.
As usual - no answers, no case.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: akenaton
Date: 26 Aug 15 - 04:56 AM

You are of course correct in some of the statements you make Jim, but don't forget, it was the "liberalism" of the banking system which was a major cause of its failure.


Everything requires regulation including society. If police officers and even fire officers are attacked by stone throwing thugs who are bent of causing damage and mayhem (fire and stones kill too), then there will be casualties.
Police and firemen are just doing their jobs, and under a socialist system they will still be required to do their jobs......when a couple of EDL supporters get bashed, will you be whining or cheering?

To build a new and better society order must be maintained, my years in the CP told me that violent confrontation is counter productive and that all sections of society must be convinced socialism and a less wasteful way of life are imperative. Unbridled consumerism is double edged and we are just beginning to feel the steel.

Too much diversion into meaningless personal rights issues obscures the major battle, as well as weakening the ability of the people to stand against the things you point at in derision.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 26 Aug 15 - 05:35 AM

"but don't forget, it was the "liberalism" of the banking system which was a major cause of its failure."
Mre Alice in Wonderland Ake - words mean what I want them to mean.
You make as much nonsense of the English language as you do of left politics.
"Everything requires regulation including society"
It does, as does understanding why people act the way they do - the disfranchisement and alienation experienced by many people in today's society - young blacks stopped and searched for being black, the frustration of unemployed people who are treated like social pariahs.... writing them off as "stone-throwing thugs, doesn't hack it - more alienation.
We live in a society which is built on unbridled consumerism - why should we be surprised when people become part of it?
Violent confrontation is unproductive, but it's also two sided - I was part of the giant Grosvner Square demo, and watched as people threw banners at the police - then went and joined them when the formed barriers against demonstrators (provocateurs, planted in among the demonstrators)
I watched the footage of striking miners being baton charged by mounted policemen - beautifully represented by a miner's wife about to have her head laid open by a baton wielding thug on horseback.
You've expressed toyr contempt for Blair Peach, who was murdered by having his head rammed into the corner of a wall by two 'guardians of the law!!'.
You eally have to make up your mind which side you're on if you claim to be a "socialist" - so far you've made a point of throwing your stones at 'our side'.
Personal rights - that's what we protect because it's what affects us most.
You have a strange, schizophrenic approach to politics I couldn't begin to understand.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 26 Aug 15 - 10:29 AM

The Tories must be rubbing their hands in glee at the cock-up Labour are making of the leadership election. An eminent trade unionist has now been excluded and it looks like he will be joined by thousands of others. The executive seem to be saying if you don't agree with their current policies you are not allowed a vote. I hope it doesn't give the current (miss)administration any ideas...

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 26 Aug 15 - 10:46 AM

The only mission of many media commentators seems to be to fill the space or time alotted to them, and follow the preferences of their employers.

But my point was that the forty economists who wrote that letter weren't media commentstors, unless everyone who writes a letter to the papers is a media commentator. Or for that matter, any of us when we post on the Mudcat.

Women's carriages in the old days didn't mean men only carriages, but mixed carriages (or typically, mixed compartments), and the same would presumaly apply if they were revived. An excellent idea.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 26 Aug 15 - 11:23 AM

I mean the compartments that ween't "Ladies Only" were open to anyone. The reverse of Smoker's Compartments, because when they had those, you didn't have to be a smoker to use them, just smoker tolerant.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: Musket
Date: 27 Aug 15 - 04:06 AM

It'd be interesting to see how many lasses pass the "ladies" test at Doncaster train station.

The journalist Bernard Levin once said that he didn't smoke but preferred to sit in the smoking section of aeroplanes as you met a better class of people. No substance to the claim but fun to read. Or journalism as its called.

Reading some of the hilarious bollocks above, it got me thinking. Liberal bankers are the cause of someone's failures. Liberal political parties run Scotland in a liberal way. Liberal dogshit fouls the pavement. Liberal trouble makers cause the police to react. Liberal magistrates prevent cruelty to dogs. Liberal Mudcat contributors piss themselves laughing at bigotry laced with confusion.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: GUEST,Guest, Des
Date: 27 Aug 15 - 08:09 AM

Now the truth is out:

https://markfiddaman.wordpress.com/2015/08/21/6-links-jeremy-corbyn-doesnt-want-you-to-know-about/

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: akenaton
Date: 27 Aug 15 - 03:26 PM

"Personal rights - that's what we protect because it's what affects us most.
You have a strange, schizophrenic approach to politics I couldn't begin to understand.
Jim Carroll"

You don't seem to have grasped the seriousness of the situation Jim, as I said earlier, it is imperative that Jeremy is elected leader if we are not to waste the next twenty years.
He will of course not win the next GE, but a split in the Party will produce a platform for the promotion of a better way to run society.
At the moment there is no political alternative being presented to the electorate.

"That's what affects us most".....the legislation in favour of homosexual "marriage", has taken up a huge amount of time and energy
it affects a tiny fraction of 1% of the population, had that time and energy been directed towards educating the population about economic alternatives, perhaps Mr Corbyn would have an even chance in a general election.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: akenaton
Date: 27 Aug 15 - 03:27 PM

Surely it's time for a "beer interlude"?

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 27 Aug 15 - 07:57 PM

"You don't seem to have grasped the seriousness of the situation Jim, "
I've been aware of the seriousness of the situation for amny years, whuich is why I gave up voting for any of them.
"it is imperative that Jeremy is elected leader "
It might change things for the better, but at least it will make the Labour Party look to their Laurels.
"but a split in the Party will produce a platform for the promotion of a better way to run society."
The Labour Party has totally lost direction - Blair had the honesty to announe the total Toryising of what was onvce a working Party set up by the Trades Union Movement to make the world a better place for working people - it is now an enthusiastic part of everything that is bad in our society - what's to split
"has taken up a huge amount of time and energy"
Quite rightly, it was a massive step towards putting right a massive, built-in injustice in our society; now it is as dead as Capital Punishment, and all the other quaint traditions that were a part of British life.
"it affects a tiny fraction of 1% of the population,"
So what - do you count heads before you end human rights abuses?
Actually, virtually no time was spent - in parliament or on the media putting homophobia in its place - probably more time and money is spent regularly organising The X Factor.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: akenaton
Date: 28 Aug 15 - 05:02 AM

A huge wrong my arse, homosexuals had all the legal rights of heterosexuals under civil union, in fact they have MORE rights now than heterosexuals.
It was about redefinition, so that the word "marriage" was available to them.

It certainly was not worth the time and effort, and it has caused society to split even further ....If so called socialists would concentrate on the economic arguments and inspiring the youth of our country to see that we do not have to be rich to be "worthwhile", then we might make some political progress.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 28 Aug 15 - 05:06 AM

"A huge wrong my arse"
Whoops - there's a Freudian slip! Always wondered about the real face behind the mask of homophobia.
"in fact they have MORE rights now than heterosexuals."
Utter nonsense.
"It certainly was not worth the time and effort, and it has caused society to split even further"
Not as far as you're concerned - you've always made your views perfectly clear.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: akenaton
Date: 28 Aug 15 - 05:18 AM

Try to stick to the points made Jim Humour does not become you and makes you look evasive.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: GUEST,Musket
Date: 28 Aug 15 - 05:21 AM

More rights..

This gets better.

Society hasn't split. Bigots have been outed, which is ironic given the topic.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: akenaton
Date: 28 Aug 15 - 05:45 AM

As well as being evasive Jim you are also wrong. Homosexuals can choose between single, "married" or Union status.
Union status is not available to heterosexuals.

Apologies may be accepted regarding your insulting comments.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 28 Aug 15 - 06:40 AM

"Union status" - is positive discrimination to counteract bigotry such as that clearly displayed by you - homosexuals remain a persecuted group in Britain and elsewhere in Europe.
Their actual rights fall far below those of heterosexuals and there are daily examples of this being the case.
"Apologies may be accepted regarding your insulting comments."
I don't consider suggesting that those who are as vociferous as you are may well be suppressing latent homosexuality, "insulting" in the slightest and the fact that you do is further indication of your homophobia - in the unlikely event that further evidence was
needed.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: GUEST
Date: 28 Aug 15 - 06:44 AM

I do hope they keep up the in fighting, they got the message in May, they are a party of borrow spend and borrow. They created the immigration problem and the financial crisis.
Conservative rule suits me just fine, so allow them to get on with the job and long may the self destruction of Labour continue.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: akenaton
Date: 28 Aug 15 - 07:14 AM

Jim, you are getting worse :0)
"Union status" - is positive discrimination to counteract bigotry such as that clearly displayed by you - homosexuals remain a persecuted group in Britain and elsewhere in Europe."....That is gobbled gook, the stupidest post in this thread and that's saying something.
We are talking about UK legislation, Civil union is on the statute book. Homosexuals have three legal choices regarding status, heterosexuals have two...end of story.

It looks like you agree with discrimination when it supports YOUR ideology?

Regarding my sexuality, you know no more about me in that respect, than I know about you....if I was crass enough I could suggest that your support for homosexuality points to doubts about your heterosexual status, but I do not have any real evidence of that. Your remarks are simply a cowardly and clumsy form of attempted intimidation.......I am never affected by such tactics.
Your remarks are insulting to me, my wife and family.

Try to confine yourself to the issues of who would make the best Labour leader and how we accomplish it. Keep the personal stuff out.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: GUEST
Date: 28 Aug 15 - 07:20 AM

Has someone here a cure for piles lol

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 28 Aug 15 - 07:26 AM

"end of story."
Not quite - homosexuals are still subject to massive bias by society - anything that can be done to even things out is welcome, as far as I' concerned.
It is within my lifetime that homosexuality has moved from being illegal (one of Britain's great war heroes was chemically castrated and driven to commit suicide after having cracked the Enigma code), to now being legal - the next step is to make it acceptable.
"It looks like you agree with discrimination when it supports YOUR ideology"
No - I accept discrimination when it produces fairness.
You are a prime example of those who would oppose that fairness with your "gay plague" and "attacks on family life" accusations - evidence enough the dinosaurs still walk the earth.
Fairness and equality isn't an "ideology" - it is a basic human right.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: Spleen Cringe
Date: 28 Aug 15 - 10:39 AM

"You can't change society you can only strive to make society work."

Err, doesn't mending something that's broken change it? From broken to mended at the very least.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: akenaton
Date: 28 Aug 15 - 10:50 AM

"Fairness and equality isn't an "ideology" - it is a basic human right.".....Oh?   whatever gave you that idea, I've lived seventy years and the longer I live the more unequal and unfair this society becomes

What happened to the financial system, how everyone was robbed in clear daylight, how we had to bail out the system, how the most vulnerable in society are being squeezed by austerity while the high earners get tax cuts.   :0) and it was all passed off with hardly a murmur, the system continues as before, but we did get "marriage for a tiny sexual minority who don't really want it.....well that's all right then!!

Call yourself a socialist, you are a pitiful fake....you care more for your popularity on this forum, than working for a sustainable society.
If you really gave a shit about homosexuals, you would be out campaigning for more testing and contact tracing among MSM, which is now being promoted by all health agencies.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 28 Aug 15 - 12:15 PM

So Police Scotland must think it OK.
You are wasting police time, which is an offence.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 28 Aug 15 - 12:56 PM

"whatever gave you that idea"
the basic right to be treated as a human being is fundamental to any civilised society - that bigotry or political opportunism by politicians seeking election, deprive various groups - notably those of a 'different' colour or sexual orientation is an infringement of that right.
The fact that those human rights are being infringed is a political sign of the times - Mrs T. described mass-murderer, Augusto Pinochet as a great democrat - as the song nearly said "Thatcher ain't dead" - she is still very much among us in spirit.
"you care more for your popularity on this forum"
Hardly - the last thing anybody can accuse me of is playing to the crowd - both on politics and music.
A somewhat spiteful remark, I think
Pack it in Muskie - it would suit them to have this thread closed.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 28 Aug 15 - 01:24 PM

I never understand why "Tax and Spend" is proclaimed as if there was something wrong with it. Governments are sipposed to be about ensuring we have thie things we need, especially the things we can't buy as individuals. Money is needed to pay for that, and that comes primarily from taxation. (Borrowing is just putting off the taxation.)

Tax and spend is fine, so long as the spending is on stuff that's good for us to have, and the taxation falls on people who can afford it. And given those two conditions, the more of it the merrier.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: DMcG
Date: 28 Aug 15 - 05:05 PM

Nor is there, MCGrath: every government of every shade taxes and spends, and they also all promote enterprise. The difference between parties on these things is a matter of degree, not absolute.

However, as you say "tax and spend" is treated as great evil. This is because it is axiomatic in some quarters that the individual is better placed to spend their own money than government. In the extreme, that means persuing the lowest possible taxation and everyone buying what they need in terms of health provision, security services, perhaps even fire services via insurances, as happened in the far-enough past. And if everyone's income was sufficient to cover all their needs adequately, maybe that would make sense. But since it is not, the governemt - at least in the UK - provides some level of "socialism". The government decrees, for example, that schools and police services are provided whether people use them or not as a common good. Similarly roads are free or have tolls on the same thinking.

As far as taxation is concerned, it is the decision which services are a common good, or an individual's choice that decides "left" and "right". And more generally it is this split between common and individual interest that separates the sides. Though to repeat once more, all governments do both.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 28 Aug 15 - 08:23 PM

To me the idea that extremely rich people are better placed to spend their money individually than the rest of us would be collectively strikes me as absurd.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: DMcG
Date: 29 Aug 15 - 02:30 AM

I wouldn't disagree much, McGrath. My main quibble is that 'extremely rich' condition. I think even those with small incomes also need to pay their share. And we need to face up to that because people of average income and certainly below need to watch what they spend very carefully and it is very easily turned into a point of resentment by those who wish to manipulate things that a government is taking some of it to "waste" of things that don't directly benefit them. Very few people really object to taxation for things that they see the benefits of - the NHS of course, but also road maintenance, etc - so the manipulator always focus on things that don't so obviously benefit the employed worker. Hence the current demonisation of benefits.

I watched Newnight last night where they had two small focus groups of ex Labour voters commenting on each of the candidates as a prospective Prime Minister. It is sad but hardly unexpected that these groups knew so little about the election that they didn't even know the names of the candidates. However afterwards Danny Finkelstein (I?) argued fairly persuasively that the focus groups showed that Labour could not persue principle and electability at the same time at the moment but he thought it might be a good thing in the longer term for labour to clarify its principles at this stage. The MP wheeled on as a talking head head didn't really have much to say beyond making the obvious point that Corbyn has been wildly underestimated so far, so writing him off as a Prime Minister might be unwise.

What intrigues me about Corbyn is that he has no wish to be a leader, of the party or of government of the kind we have had in the past. Invariably we have aimed for strong leaders who decide (after so,e discussion certainly) and state a policy after which every MP is expected to behave as if they are 100% in accord with it, and have been all their lives. Corbyn is determinedly not that sort of leader and has a much more consensual approach. Whether that can be made to work is up for grabs, but the entire media, political classes and business world will be against trying it ...

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: GUEST,Dave
Date: 29 Aug 15 - 04:29 AM

Jim, its interesting how you state that fairness and equality is a basic human right, I agree with you but it reminds me of how I came to realise that the tories were not for me. It was about 1980, I was in Australia, I had gone in 1979, and Norman Tebbitt was on the radio. It was something the ABC had picked up from the BBC, maybe even Desert Island Discs. He was asked whether he still believed in fairness and equality, as he had in his youth (I forget the evidence for this). He answered that you could not have both. And I realised that the Conservative party which I had voted for, the party of Edward Heath (ok, forget the recent accusations), had turned into something quite, quite different. And something to be opposed at every turn.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: Stanron
Date: 29 Aug 15 - 04:30 AM

I saw that Newsnight program last night. It was a very small focus group of people who had in the past voted labour but didn't last time. Yvette Cooper seemed to come out best but it wasn't clear exactly what clips of each candidate had been shown. Interesting though.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: akenaton
Date: 29 Aug 15 - 04:30 AM

The focus groups were of people who had been Labour voters, but had not voted Labour in the last couple of elections.

That would indicate people of "Blairite" views and listening to their chatter, that was what they seemed to be, aspirational people, without many socialist values.

OK, socialism may not be popular with the voters, but the Labour Party was founded on these principles and if it is to continue as a "Blairite Liberal Democratic Party", what would be it's purpose?
We already have Two "liberal Democratic Parties in the Conservatives and the Liberals.
A party split would be the best thing, with Mr Corbyn advancing some socialist ideas in conjunction with other smaller Parties like the Greens and Nationalists.
There are huge changes in the pipeline over EU membership and National Sovereignty, we need a platform for a range of views to be aired.

Career politicians in the "Blairite" mould are being firmly rejected

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: DMcG
Date: 29 Aug 15 - 04:58 AM

Don't think I'd agree with Tebbitt on much, but he is right to point out that when it comes down to it there is a tension between fairness and equality, as there is between all the basic virtues: Fairness, equality, freedom, justice ...

It is easy to treat fairness and equality as more or less synonyms but clearly when you use both together like that, you are making a distinction between them. And when you do that the difference is where the tension comes from. If you push that difference in one direction you will increase fairness but decrease equality; push it the other way and you will decrease fairness but increase equality.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: akenaton
Date: 29 Aug 15 - 05:20 AM

"the basic right to be treated as a human being is fundamental to any civilised society"

Nobody could disagree with that Jim, but you go on to equate discrimination on grounds of skin colour or race, with discrimination on grounds of sexual behaviour.
There are many issues involving "discrimination" against various types of sexual practice which I am sure even you would agree with.
Complicated issue which require to be dealt with in an adult fashion, with all the facts, including associated health issues and effect on children taken into the equation.
As you already stated the latest "marriage" legislation was pushed through by media pressure with almost no political debate.

There is a new thread on Mudcat dealing with pressure to legalise Polygamy....would this come under your criteria for ""the basic right to be treated as a human being is fundamental to any civilised society"?

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: akenaton
Date: 30 Aug 15 - 04:48 AM

See Blair has weighed in again with the poison.
I hope Jeremy gets the leadership, so that at last people have a political choice.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: DMcG
Date: 30 Aug 15 - 05:07 AM

I was amused that Tony Blair wrote I read with care Rosie Fletcher's passionate piece in praise of Jeremy Corbyn in last week's Observer.

And then did not address any of the points she raised.

Don't get me wrong: I still think it possible, as I said somewhere else, that when it comes to the actual count Corbyn might not be there come 12 September. But if he is, I don't think the Tories will be anything like as pleased as they make out. They know exactly how to handle the other three, but Corbyn is much harder - if every Labour Bigwig calls him a dangerous leftie and he still gets elected, can the Tories be quite certain doing more of the same will work for them? Of course there is a difference between the 600,000 - of whom about one in ten has actually been to a Corbyn rally - and the often disengaged electorate as a whole, but how things will turn out is far from certain for anyone. And the Conservatives will have their own leadership battles to go through before 2020.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: akenaton
Date: 30 Aug 15 - 06:49 AM

I don't think the electorate are "disengaged" over this issue D.
Labour are on a well deserved hiding no matter how the leadership election turns out......if it is perceived as a rigged election traditional labour voters will leave in droves to UKIP and the SNP.

Jeremy is elected Labour will lose one or two GE's, but socialist thinking will have been incorporated into our political system for the first time in fifty years.
The "Blairites" will desert and regroup as a "democratic" alternative, so will still be the main danger to socialism.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: DMcG
Date: 30 Aug 15 - 08:12 AM

Disengaged from Westminster-style Politics I should have said. Not disengaged from politics in its wider sense (eg 38degrees and similar)

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: akenaton
Date: 30 Aug 15 - 08:15 AM

Sorry, misunderstood.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 30 Aug 15 - 11:05 AM

One thing that people seem to be ignoring is that the result is probably already decided. Most people with votes have surely have voted. No real point in writing articles urging them to vote one way and another.

Of course, as Stalin pointed out, it's not who votes that counts, it's who counts the votes, and it appears that even after votes have been cast there will be the possibility of finding ways to cancel them. And it will be votes for Corbyn being cancelled.

But as a way of affecting the outcome of the election,Tony Blair latest hysterical contribution is pointless. Too late for his diatribe to sway undcided voters to back Corbyn.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: akenaton
Date: 30 Aug 15 - 11:57 AM

Nice one Mr M!

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: akenaton
Date: 30 Aug 15 - 06:28 PM

Umunna emerges tonight from beneath his stone to front a new anti Corbyn pressure group,

This career politician, who decided not to stand for leadership as it threatened to be a "poisoned chalice", obviously making the assumption that he could not win the next election and would hold his fire for another four years, has the effrontery to cast doubt on Jeremy's electability :0)
Blairite to the soles of his muddy boots......have no illusions these people are the real enemy of socialism. Don't be fooled again.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: akenaton
Date: 30 Aug 15 - 06:42 PM

Incidently, is it all right to change the thread title to "electing an Old Labour leader"?

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 31 Aug 15 - 06:39 AM

Latest letter from John Prescott -

Hello comrade! (We can still say that can't we?)

I'm going to break the habit of a lifetime and be brief.

This leadership election is nearly over, and it looks like it's down to a choice between Jeremy Corbyn and Andy Burnham.

I was glad I encouraged MPs to nominate Jeremy to get him into this race because we really needed a debate on Labour's future.

And what a debate it's been! People are flocking to meetings, our number of members and supporters has tripled and there's a buzz about Labour again.

But now you need to decide who's the best person to lead us back to power in 2020.

And for me, that person is Andy Burnham.

From progressive renationalisation of our railways to integrating social care into our NHS, Andy has the ideas, experience and passion to unite this party and put our traditional values in a modern setting.

We need a leader who won't just lead protests ON Downing Street. Andy's the best candidate to march us back INTO Downing Street.

Because if we don't choose a leader who can win in 2020, we'll give the Tory's another five years of misrule to hit the poor and dismantle everything we achieved in Government.

So if you haven't yet, please vote for Andy today.

The future of our country and our party depends on it.

And you'll make me happy too!

Thank you and enjoy your bank holiday.

JP

PS: There's still lots more Andy and his team would like to do to help get out his vote this campaign. Please donate anything you can to help make that possible by clicking here.



Posted without comment.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 31 Aug 15 - 07:51 AM

He's wrong.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: DMcG
Date: 31 Aug 15 - 08:12 AM

AN article by Owen Jones: My honest thoughts on the Corbyn campaign — and overcoming formidable obstacles

Another well written article by Owen. I especially liked this bit "A strong movement is a precondition for success. But it is no guarantee of it, by any stretch. If Corbyn wins, the challenges, as I say, will be enormous, but not insurmountable. I'm not writing this to dampen people's hopes, or to prepare excuses, but because people have to be ready and prepared. See those guns in the distance? Yeah, well we're running towards them. We have to be hopeful and optimistic, but also prepared for what awaits"

It is a long way to the next Parliamentary election, and whoever is elected has a hard path to follow. It's certainly possible that much of the enthusiasm generated for Corbyn evaporates as quickly as it arose. And that to be seems the biggest threat to his electability in 2020, not specifics.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: oggie
Date: 31 Aug 15 - 08:17 AM

Corbyn is doing well because the basic slogan of the other three "We'll do austerity but a bit more nicely" has almost no appeal to anyone who is actually threatened by austerity which is a surprising number of us.

When I hear the appeal that we must not alienate the "middle ground" I look at where that middle ground is pitched and realise that not only is it far to the right of the the pre-Blair Labour Party, it is far to the right of the pre-Thatcher Tory Party and on some issues further to the right than she was.

Blaor and Blairism is held out by some as a shining example of what can be done. What his acolytes don't seem to get is that to many he was a crashing disappointment and his legacy isn't a proud one.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 31 Aug 15 - 08:40 AM

The biggest problem for Jeremy Corbyn, if he wins the leadership, isnt so much going to be the attacks he'll get from the Tories and the right-wing papers, it's going to be the hostility of Labour MPs and so forth.

There's a story about a new MP making his first visit to the chamber after being elected. He talks about the excitement he feels about facing "the enemy" opposite. A Veteran MP shakes his head ."They aren't the enemy. They are your adversaries. Your enemy here are the bastard behind you and all round you."

That's more true for Corbyn than for anyone. He's got plenty of friends out in the party, but in the House of Commons there are pretty few.kkk

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 01 Sep 15 - 07:02 PM

Has anybody here with a vote in this not voted yet, and still making up their mind? I rather doubt if there are many.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: akenaton
Date: 02 Sep 15 - 03:53 AM

People are very easily manipulated Mr McGrath, there are probably very many more in the country who don't agree with Jeremy's ideas.

"Everyone has a little bit to lose" syndrome. Financial aspiration is a powerful tool of manipulation....although 1 in 10,000 make it most people, especially young people, believe that it just might be them.......soon money becomes the only goal, without it or the means to acquire it people are deemed worthless.

METANOIA.....I heard the word discussed on radio the other morning, it means complete and utter change, in thinking and practice, an intense change almost evangelical in nature, but not sectarian.
I wonder another if another JC has come along to implement it two millennia later?    :0)

I would be a disciple.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: akenaton
Date: 02 Sep 15 - 04:03 AM

Heard Umunna being interviewed this morning, he evaded every question on whether he would work with Jeremy, while pretending that the Party must close ranks...."to defeat the Tories"

He is a dangerous fifth columnist, a career politician who sees a Corbyn victory as ten years in the wilderness for him.

With a few subtle differences, he is the Blair of thirty years ago. Britian's Obama?.........dream on chuck!!
The other candidates are in the same mould disgusting self serving frauds......Scrub the lot and start over.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: DMcG
Date: 02 Sep 15 - 07:24 AM

There is a slightly convoluted argument on Andy Burnham's Web site which is worth struggling through. Essentially it points out that unless jeremy gets above 50% in the first round he is unlikely to win because he is most likely to be in last place or unlisted for the other candidates. Certainly it would be a slightly odd voter who put Liz in first place and jeremy in second
second.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 02 Sep 15 - 07:35 AM

One intriguing fact is that Jeremy Corbyn and Tony Blair were first electef in 1983 - on the manifesto that's been attacked so often as hopelessly leftwing.

Here it is online A lot of the stuff in it that was so attacked now seems not at all controversial or extreme.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 02 Sep 15 - 07:51 AM

The fact remains that the Tories breathed a bloody big sigh of relief when Umunna withdrew. In my view he would have been the only Labour leader who could have beaten the Tories in 2020. As it stands, Labour haven't got a cat in hell's chance. I suppose it depends on what we think matters most.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 02 Sep 15 - 08:22 AM

Umunna is very close indeed to those on the right of the Tory party, including Cameron. (Umunna and Javid look and sound like clones of each other in what they say as well as how they look)

What would really be tye point? I suppose it can be said even though the lleaders of tye two parties are pooitically in similar places, the body of the party will pull the way it behaves towards the left or right.

But politics as just a game of the In party and the Out party changing places maybe it would be better to dispense with elections, and take turn and turn about. Democcracy was an interesting idea, but it never really worked out...

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 02 Sep 15 - 08:23 AM

That should of course have been "left of the Tory party"

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 02 Sep 15 - 08:56 AM

I gathered that, Kevin. Anyone to the right of the current Tory party would probably be akin to Genghis Khan!

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 02 Sep 15 - 04:25 PM

Actually by "to the right" i meant in the party but on the right wing of it. English is funny language when it comes to stuff like that.

People always use Genghis Khan as an example of extreme rightwing. I'm not sure if that was particularly true. What distinguished him from the leaders of other nations of the time was his extreme ruthlessness. Wipe out a few sizeable cities entirely as an example of what happens if people don't surrender, and the idea is the others roll over, and it worked. Sort of Harry Truman style.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 02 Sep 15 - 05:00 PM

I think Irritable Duncan Smith used his as a role model ;-)

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 02 Sep 15 - 05:00 PM

...or even used hiM (GK) as a role model...

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 03 Sep 15 - 05:46 PM

Voting deadline was noon today. So the voting is done. Now for the bargaining. I see Chuka Umunna has started making overtures to Corbyn, and there are suggestions he would be Shadow Chancellor in a Corbyn Shadow Cabinet. You couldn't make it up.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 03 Sep 15 - 05:56 PM

That would be OK in my book. All things are relative.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: akenaton
Date: 03 Sep 15 - 06:17 PM

Jeremy will have to start as he means to finish. His only hope is to split the party, if he accommodates these people they will finish him.

They are the enemy.....in Westminster and even in Mudcat
This is no time for compromises, the public have started to listen and they want to hear the true word, not the Blairite doggerel.

METANOIA is what we need.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 03 Sep 15 - 06:30 PM

With our system of voting, so splitting means electoral suicide. If there's a split, it'll be by the right, once again. But I think it's a lot more likely there'll be mass overnight conversions, and Umunna is getting in first with that.

But Jeremy had better watch his back. Which he will.

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: Peter K (Fionn)
Date: 03 Sep 15 - 06:39 PM

McG, according to SKy this evening, about 260,000 have voted to date. And the ballot did not close today. There's another week to go. (Noon, Thursday 10 Sept.)

Subject: RE: BS: electing a new labour leader
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 03 Sep 15 - 06:52 PM

Oops - yes, I got my dates wrong. It's next Thursday noon that's the deadline for voting. So all to play for.