Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 14, 2019 16:31:40 GMT
The effete RICHARD BURGON has thrown in his hat for the deputy leadership FOR FUCK'S SAKE It is a fabulous hat THO to be fair. Pink fur!
|
|
|
Post by Reactionary Rage on Dec 15, 2019 17:56:03 GMT
I presume that rather sneering remark means you've posted it as an example of her cluelessness. The actual content of the article posits that the definitions of working class still used, in a rather blanket and unthinking way, by many political commentators are very outdated. It seems a fair point and well made. She's using it as a slight of hand to argue against the notion that Labour has lost the working classes a few days before Labour got their arses kicked. I'm aware of the kind of office work she refers to, I've been there, so I get what she's saying but it's a funny argument considering what's happened. Sarkar, Jones, et al are dogma muppets who live in a London bubble. They have no influence outside of making right wingers laugh. If you think they are a good example of modern left wing thinking then your problems are bigger than you realise.
|
|
|
Post by tory on Dec 15, 2019 19:03:28 GMT
I have to agree. There are some serious left-wing voices out there like Ben Cobley, Ed Rennie, Michael Merrick, Sebastian Wallbank and Paul Embery, who are all absolutely sick of Momentum, identity dogma and the likes of Sarkar and Bastani, who spout metrollectualism that no-one outside of London either reads or is interested in. The election showed that completely.
|
|
|
Post by tory on Dec 15, 2019 19:04:22 GMT
Labour "winning the argument" apparently. Lord knows what losing the argument would look like.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 15, 2019 20:36:49 GMT
I presume that rather sneering remark means you've posted it as an example of her cluelessness. The actual content of the article posits that the definitions of working class still used, in a rather blanket and unthinking way, by many political commentators are very outdated. It seems a fair point and well made. She's using it as a slight of hand to argue against the notion that Labour has lost the working classes a few days before Labour got their arses kicked. I'm aware of the kind of office work she refers to, I've been there, so I get what she's saying but it's a funny argument considering what's happened. Sarkar, Jones, et al are dogma muppets who live in a London bubble. They have no influence outside of making right wingers laugh. If you think they are a good example of modern left wing thinking then your problems are bigger than you realise. The headline is misleading, but then journalists don't choose headlines, sub-editors do. The article makes no prediction on how Labour will perform in the election. The article is arguing for a wider definition of working class. Sarker and Jones live in no more of a bubble than any other metropolitan journalist, in fact I bet they've got a better understanding of the average person than your average political journalist. We're never going to agree on this stuff because you're developing such an obsessive hatred of the left.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 15, 2019 20:47:04 GMT
I have to agree. There are some serious left-wing voices out there like Ben Cobley, Ed Rennie, Michael Merrick, Sebastian Wallbank and Paul Embery, who are all absolutely sick of Momentum, identity dogma and the likes of Sarkar and Bastani, who spout metrollectualism that no-one outside of London either reads or is interested in. The election showed that completely.
Where have you got this list of names from? I think your tolerance of left-wing thinkers is akin to the Victorian attitude to children. They should be seen but not heard! So you don't mind them so long as they are extremely obscure and unread with zero influence on anyone. I did google a couple of names. Sebastian Wallbank ( obviously with a name like that he must be one of those in touch with the working class unlike that nasty Corbyn lot) didn't return a google hit, while Michael Merrick is just some teacher who apparently wants to "reclaim an authentic conservative legacy within the now liberal-dominated Labour Party". Dear me, no wonder you like him!
|
|
|
Post by oh oooh on Dec 15, 2019 20:50:58 GMT
...such an obsessive hatred of the left. It fuels so much of what's been posted here. Real foaming-at-the-mouth stuff.
|
|
|
Post by oh oooh on Dec 15, 2019 20:58:09 GMT
I have to agree. There are some serious left-wing voices out there like Ben Cobley, Ed Rennie, Michael Merrick, Sebastian Wallbank and Paul Embery, who are all absolutely sick of Momentum, identity dogma and the likes of Sarkar and Bastani, who spout metrollectualism that no-one outside of London either reads or is interested in. The election showed that completely.
Where have you got this list of names from? He thinks it will impress us. Wait until he hears what Wally Bainbridge, Frank Aldeparanto, Colin Waverley and Brynn Waterfall have to say on the matter!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 15, 2019 20:59:34 GMT
Where have you got this list of names from? He thinks it will impress us. Wait until he hears what Wally Bainbridge, Frank Aldeparanto, Colin Waverley and Brynn Waterfall have to say on the matter!
|
|
|
Post by tory on Dec 15, 2019 21:10:34 GMT
...such an obsessive hatred of the left. It fuels so much of what's been posted here. Real foaming-at-the-mouth stuff. I don't hate the left at all. I've stated on here at all times that a strong, moderate and coherent Labour party is essential for British political life. It is the one party that can provide consistent opposition to the Tories, which is necessary in our system to stop the other one dominating for too long. Already, some Tories are worried that such an ineffective opposition will provide them with a blank cheque to do what they want. The Liberal Democrats are a dreadful party with wishy-washy policies and ready to drop their pants at the very hint of power. My distaste is for radical leftism, much of which, in my opinion, is based on outdated class-based hostility and Gramscian aggression. It is destructive and doesn't do anyone any favours. The very visible evidence of this is the current distress the Labour party is in after 4 years in which they were led by one of its acolytes.
|
|
|
Post by tory on Dec 15, 2019 21:20:35 GMT
I think the Blue Labour movement encapsulates the vein of thinking I like. You won't like it, but I think it appeals to me in the same way that the SDP does. People who are economically left, but culturally and socially conservative. They are not interested in the wider ramifications of leftist ideology, identity politics and the like. They want communitarian ideas and family values.
Ultimately, one has to remember that the real successes of the Labour party in the 20th century were born of consensus. Attlee and Wilson were public school boys, educated to a high level but with strong connections to working class people. In 1945 the Labour party won a mandate because 80% of the population were working class, but also realised that they could not go forth with the real socialist zeal that many in the party wanted because they needed to win the middle ground. Johnson's victory is born of the same idea - that they will need to invest in infrastructure, the NHS and the like to repay back the trust put in them by those voters who decided to cross over. Whether he succeeds is another matter, but I think he understands this deep down in a way that, say, Cameron never was able to.
The reality is that centrism is the winner again. I'm not sure Johnson is a real Tory - he's a classic Liberal more than anything else and an opportunist. He's certainly not a social conservative.
|
|
|
Post by oh oooh on Dec 15, 2019 21:24:21 GMT
Anyway it looks like Rebecca Long-Bailey is going to take over as Labour leader, so that's them fucked for another decade or so.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 15, 2019 21:28:21 GMT
I think the Blue Labour movement encapsulates the vein of thinking I like. You won't like it, but I think it appeals to me in the same way that the SDP does. People who are economically left, but culturally and socially conservative. They are not interested in the wider ramifications of leftist ideology, identity politics and the like. They want communitarian ideas and family values. It's not a movement Toby. It's just a couple of people with barely an online presence. Maybe their ideas will catch on, but at the moment they are completely inconsequential.
|
|
|
Post by DarknessFish on Dec 15, 2019 21:28:26 GMT
I'd argue that the main thing that shifted the vote in the traditional labour strongholds was the possibility of real change. I don't think people believe political parties of either persuasion, and there's very little evidence that in these neglected parts of the country that it was the possibility of free broadband that was the main driver for a huge swing to the tories. Whether the economy has been booming, or whether we've had austerity, very little changes for the people of communities which have seen no investment, and no interest from Westminster. They still know that the Tories aren't interested in them. But they know that Brexit will bring a very real shock to the system, and they're just hoping that shock rebalances the economy to include them, just as the shock of Thatcherism excluded them. The fear that the economy will suffer doesn't hit home, because their economy always suffers. They ain't worrying about GDP.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 15, 2019 21:30:23 GMT
Anyway it looks like Rebecca Long-Bailey is going to take over as Labour leader, so that's them fucked for another decade or so. Too early to say. The unions might not support her for a start, especially if she performs poorly.
|
|