UK Labour Party Watch

surreptitious57 · **#4001** by **surreptitious57** » Oct 08, 2015 6:49 pm

Strontium Dog wrote:
He expresses an opinion that does not fit with the majority

He expresses opinions which have no substance to them and when this is pointed out to
him insists with no sense of irony at all that he does not need to be lectured to about it
But he is not interested in productive discourse and sad to say is not the only one either

mattthomas · **#4002** by **mattthomas** » Oct 08, 2015 6:50 pm

Strontium Dog wrote:
mattthomas wrote:I think the term "can give it, but not take it" applies in many of the threads this conversation pertains to.

Oh boy, does it ever. But probably not in the way you think it does.

Applies to ANYONE who gives abuse but runs to the report button when they get it. But feel free to give me your take on it.

Strontium Dog · **#4003** by **Strontium Dog** » Oct 08, 2015 6:55 pm

surreptitious57 wrote:
Strontium Dog wrote:
He expresses an opinion that does not fit with the majority

He expresses opinions which have no substance to them

And that is your opinion.

surreptitious57 · **#4004** by **surreptitious57** » Oct 08, 2015 7:28 pm

Strontium Dog wrote:
And that is your opinion

Actually no it is not because it is a fact
It is a fact since there is evidence for it
And facts and opinions are not the same

chairman bill · **#4005** by **chairman bill** » Oct 08, 2015 7:43 pm

Strontium Dog wrote:He expresses an opinion that doesn't fit with the majority. Chilling stuff.

Except that isn't the issue. But you knew that.

surreptitious57 · **#4006** by **surreptitious57** » Oct 08, 2015 7:58 pm

Emmeline wrote:
apparently everyone knows in advance that Scot will have nothing worth reading so they can just skip his posts

Yes although you still deny the possibility that some may actually want to read them to get pissed off

Also certain members are very provocative and almost everyone cannot help being provoked by them

Not everyone can be Zen like when the words of others make their blood pressure rise uncontrollably

And so what a shame the members could not collectively de stress in a communal meditation chamber

OlivierK · **#4007** by **OlivierK** » Oct 08, 2015 8:41 pm

Emmeline wrote:Good article by Stephen Kinnock today. I recommend all of it but I particularly like what he says about the working class vote:

Now is the time to renew, not retreat
(...) People simplistically say that, in order to win, Labour has to ‘reconnect with its working-class roots’, and that it is possible for us to gain votes by ‘moving to the left’. But a cursory glance at some basic statistics tells us such superficiality is nonsense. It is true that 45 years ago, manual workers and their families (the normal definition of working class) dominated our vote, accounting for 10 million Labour voters back in the early 1970s, compared with just two million middle-class Labour voters at that time.

In 2015, the composition of the British electorate, and of our vote, is completely different. In the early 1970s two thirds of all voters lived in working-class households, but in Britain today the number of middle-class voters exceeds the number of working-class voters by seven million. In addition to being substantially smaller in size than it was 40 years ago, the working class has been fragmented by de-industrialisation and the technology revolution, and so it is no longer possible to talk about it as some sort of monolithic bloc that can be mobilised around a given political cause. Indeed, it is patronising as well as illusory to do so.

It is therefore vitally important that we wake up to this new reality: we will never win another election if we attempt to present ourselves as a party that represents a narrowly defined social group. It is, quite simply, mathematically impossible.

http://labourlist.org/2015/10/now-is-th ... t-retreat/

Sure. The place to win the votes is in the centre, from people who look at the two major parties, and want to pick on that will do the best for the nation's prosperity, in a fair and honest way. They may choose one party simply because the other has a policy that impacts them badly personally, or seems incompetent, dishonest, or directionless. I think that last bit is what did for Miliband. It was the large rock that dragged him down and drowned him, as it were.

Corbyn seems at least honest and directed. The jury's out on competence. If he can convince in that area, while pointing out the unfairness of Tory policy, little more is needed. Neil Kinnock should know better than to talk about the mathematical impossibilty of political outcomes, or to make the assumption that ensuring a fair outcome for a certain group of people can only win votes from within that group; that's a betrayal of Labour principles in itself.

Edit: ah, wrong Kinnock. I'm less surprised now that I realise it wasn't Neil Kinnock.

mcgruff · **#4008** by **mcgruff** » Oct 08, 2015 9:08 pm

I think actually we should burn Stephen Kinnock at the stake as an example to others like him. After the Scottish referendum, and the recent laboru leadership election, there really is no excuse for not getting it: stop trying to reflect back to the electorate what you think they want to hear you slippery mofos. If you don't believe in anything go and sell cars or houses instead. Estate agents could use your skills.

It's your job to have principles and ideas not mine, as a voter, to tell you what these should be. Show some f*cking leadership. If I wanted a plasticine party I'd open up a toy shop.

Oh and stuff your "working class is dead" crap up your arse while you're at it. Did you not notice all the starving people using food banks? Inequality is rising and it's your job to explain to people why that's not in anybody's best interests, rich or poor, and to fight for them. Well it would be if you had any insight or principles.

Emmeline · **#4009** by **Emmeline** » Oct 09, 2015 7:40 am

mcgruff wrote:I think actually we should burn Stephen Kinnock at the stake as an example to others like him.

Beatsong · **#4010** by **Beatsong** » Oct 09, 2015 7:57 am

Emmeline wrote:Why can't you just NOT READ his posts if they piss you off so much.

Sendraks · **#4011** by **Sendraks** » Oct 09, 2015 8:03 am

Beatsong wrote:
Emmeline wrote:Why can't you just NOT READ his posts if they piss you off so much.

I consider this to be a pretty indicator that someone needs to go. When someone is seriously suggesting that people avoid reading a certain users posts, that certain user needs to either go or sort their act out. And frankly maintaining an attitude of feeling justified in getting nasty when someone challenges them, isn't at all acceptable for a rational discussion forum.

But hey, the whole ludicrous notion of ignoring other members of this forum has been done to death already. Lets not got over it again.

nunnington · **#4012** by **nunnington** » Oct 09, 2015 10:49 am

Just read Harris's piece in the Guardian, bloody hell, it's such a glowing report on the Tories, is this guy really a Labour member? He talks of a 'pretty spectacular demonstration of power' by the govt - what? I suppose it's just part of the Guardian's anti-Corbyn politics.

Also, he praises 'the insights and influence of George Osborne', Christ, who's talking about brown arms? I think Corbyn is the only hope for Labour, as this dross would doom them.

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfre ... ss-protest

ronmcd · **#4013** by **ronmcd** » Oct 09, 2015 10:50 am

The younger Kinnock is a pale and shallow ghost of his dad, I don't think I've seen him say a single thing in interviews that I agreed with, or he's qualified them horribly with Blairite nonsense.

Of course he's given the media exposure because of his name, not his own skills or experience so far as a new MP.

In my opinion.

ronmcd · **#4014** by **ronmcd** » Oct 09, 2015 10:55 am

nunnington wrote:Just read Harris's piece in the Guardian, bloody hell, it's such a glowing report on the Tories, is this guy really a Labour member? He talks of a 'pretty spectacular demonstration of power' by the govt - what? I suppose it's just part of the Guardian's anti-Corbyn politics.

Also, he praises 'the insights and influence of George Osborne', Christ, who's talking about brown arms? I think Corbyn is the only hope for Labour, as this dross would doom them.

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfre ... ss-protest

Hmm. I think you're misinterpreting Harris. This is a guy who IS one of the few real honest left of centre voices. You're reading Harris explaining a problem (Osbourne's clever positioning, Labour's blindness) and assuming he doesn't support Corbyn. He does. He's pointing out the dangers for Corbyn.

ronmcd · **#4015** by **ronmcd** » Oct 09, 2015 10:57 am

And it's not a glowing report on the tories. It's a terrified scream of horror. If you want to know what Harris is saying, sometimes the limited nr of characters in twitter can cut to the chase:

By me: Wake up, the Left! We're in danger of being crushed

https://twitter.com/johnharris1969/stat ... 1195200512

Sendraks · **#4016** by **Sendraks** » Oct 09, 2015 11:03 am

ronmcd wrote:
Hmm. I think you're misinterpreting Harris. This is a guy who IS one of the few real honest left of centre voices. You're reading Harris explaining a problem (Osbourne's clever positioning, Labour's blindness) and assuming he doesn't support Corbyn. He does. He's pointing out the dangers for Corbyn.

I agree - I think the article makes some good points about what Labour should be doing in connecting with the electorate and understanding how their view their lives now and how they'd like the to change, not just what you think they want. Whilst it is important to have a policy vision for what you'd like the world to be like under your Government, it won't sell unless the voters can relate it to the current circumstances and see how the policy takes them from here to the new promised land.

GrahamH · **#4017** by **GrahamH** » Oct 09, 2015 11:16 am

nunnington wrote:Just read Harris's piece in the Guardian, bloody hell, it's such a glowing report on the Tories, is this guy really a Labour member? He talks of a 'pretty spectacular demonstration of power' by the govt - what? I suppose it's just part of the Guardian's anti-Corbyn politics.

Also, he praises 'the insights and influence of George Osborne', Christ, who's talking about brown arms? I think Corbyn is the only hope for Labour, as this dross would doom them.

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfre ... ss-protest

Curiously, given all the "dinosaur, living in the past" rhetoric, there we find:

I read it in a moment of peace and quiet in Manchester, and it nailed what was afoot: a bid for lasting political dominance built on formidable foundations – not least, an updated version of the same populism that served the Conservatives so well in the Thatcher years (all about home ownership, keeping more of your own money, and the glories of hard graft). And when I got to the closing passages about the state of the left I felt a familiar pang of unease.

So Harris claims the Tories are the ones regurgitating the 1980s.

In contrast he writes:

The left’s new state of being, it seemed, is built on a political present reducible to Corbynmania and a glorious past that could somehow be revived, if only the masses understood how horrid their masters are.

He seems to have quite forgotten who got the country into the mess of 2008, or at least failed to save us, was not "working families" or "Hard left" policies. To the extent it was a UK issue, wasn't it regurgitation of Thatcherite policies, housing bubbles and financial deregulation?

nunnington · **#4018** by **nunnington** » Oct 09, 2015 11:26 am

ronmcd wrote:
nunnington wrote:Just read Harris's piece in the Guardian, bloody hell, it's such a glowing report on the Tories, is this guy really a Labour member? He talks of a 'pretty spectacular demonstration of power' by the govt - what? I suppose it's just part of the Guardian's anti-Corbyn politics.

Also, he praises 'the insights and influence of George Osborne', Christ, who's talking about brown arms? I think Corbyn is the only hope for Labour, as this dross would doom them.

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfre ... ss-protest

Hmm. I think you're misinterpreting Harris. This is a guy who IS one of the few real honest left of centre voices. You're reading Harris explaining a problem (Osbourne's clever positioning, Labour's blindness) and assuming he doesn't support Corbyn. He does. He's pointing out the dangers for Corbyn.

Well, he talks of the left 'collapsing into a state of giddy denial'. That's rather vague, but I don't understand what he means. Is he saying this about Corbyn? That's not my impression at all, in fact, it's the Blairites who seem in denial to me. And then the right have a 'hard-headed grasp of reality', yes, well let's attack the poor and vulnerable some more, that's pretty real. He talks of the Tory conference as 'real politics, happening in real time'. Eh? Yeah, benefit cuts are pretty real.

If this is going to be Labour politics in the future, count me out.

Sendraks · **#4019** by **Sendraks** » Oct 09, 2015 11:27 am

GrahamH wrote:He seems to have quite forgotten who got the country into the mess of 2008, or at least failed to save us, was not "working families" or "Hard left" policies. To the extent it was a UK issue, wasn't it regurgitation of Thatcherite policies, housing bubbles and financial deregulation?

I think its a real challenge for some Labour supporters to confront Blair for what he was, simply because he was so successful. Its hard to look at the past and try to be critical of the period 1997-2010 and say "we don't want to be like that" in a public facing way. But, if you're not prepared to do that, then the Tories can and will throw back in Corbyn's face every time he challenges them on a policy that actually is just a continuation of what Labour did in 1997-2010.

Very difficult to say "I think the Blair Government was wrong" without alienating a load of supporters.

nunnington · **#4020** by **nunnington** » Oct 09, 2015 11:32 am

Sendraks wrote:
GrahamH wrote:He seems to have quite forgotten who got the country into the mess of 2008, or at least failed to save us, was not "working families" or "Hard left" policies. To the extent it was a UK issue, wasn't it regurgitation of Thatcherite policies, housing bubbles and financial deregulation?

I think its a real challenge for some Labour supporters to confront Blair for what he was, simply because he was so successful. Its hard to look at the past and try to be critical of the period 1997-2010 and say "we don't want to be like that" in a public facing way. But, if you're not prepared to do that, then the Tories can and will throw back in Corbyn's face every time he challenges them on a policy that actually is just a continuation of what Labour did in 1997-2010.

Very difficult to say "I think the Blair Government was wrong" without alienating a load of supporters.

Well, saying that 'Blair was wrong' would be inane politically. Which bits were wrong? Which bits were right? If Corbyn starts talking in such vague abstractions, I would be very disappointed, and I agree that it would be politically a very blunted tool. On the other hand, just to move on, as if nothing has happened in the past 30 years would also be stupid. So far, I see Corbyn with a lot of political intelligence, but we shall see.

UK Labour Party Watch

Re: UK Labour Party Watch

Re: UK Labour Party Watch

Re: UK Labour Party Watch

Re: UK Labour Party Watch

Re: UK Labour Party Watch

Re: UK Labour Party Watch

Re: UK Labour Party Watch

Re: UK Labour Party Watch

Re: UK Labour Party Watch

Re: UK Labour Party Watch

Re: UK Labour Party Watch

Re: UK Labour Party Watch

Re: UK Labour Party Watch

Re: UK Labour Party Watch

Re: UK Labour Party Watch

Re: UK Labour Party Watch

Re: UK Labour Party Watch

Re: UK Labour Party Watch

Re: UK Labour Party Watch

Re: UK Labour Party Watch

Who is online