Again, a rather strange response. Have you been replaced with an ELIZA?
An extremely primitive one.
A bulletin board I go on (in fact, I've been on it for about 24 years!) used to have an ELIZA that would randomly respond to posts. At least, it was allegedly an ELIZA: I always suspected there was someone having fun behind the scenes.
I wonder if OGH has implemented a similar system on PB and called it Malc ...
It is actually the latest model TURNIP - Talking Utterly Rubbish Nonsense In Perpetuity
Again, a rather strange response. Have you been replaced with an ELIZA?
An extremely primitive one.
A bulletin board I go on (in fact, I've been on it for about 24 years!) used to have an ELIZA that would randomly respond to posts. At least, it was allegedly an ELIZA: I always suspected there was someone having fun behind the scenes.
I wonder if OGH has implemented a similar system on PB and called it Malc ...
Again, a rather strange response. Have you been replaced with an ELIZA?
An extremely primitive one.
A bulletin board I go on (in fact, I've been on it for about 24 years!) used to have an ELIZA that would randomly respond to posts. At least, it was allegedly an ELIZA: I always suspected there was someone having fun behind the scenes.
I wonder if OGH has implemented a similar system on PB and called it Malc ...
It is actually the latest model TURNIP - Talking Utterly Rubbish Nonsense In Perpetuity
I'll stick my neck out here then run for cover ...
Yes I do think it's time to move on from Remembrance Day. I think we should say 'thank you, thank you for sacrificing, thank you for what you did in the cause you were told, and may have believed, was right. We thank you.'
But now it's time to move on. By the way, I know many many people, including Conservative voters, who privately agree with me on this.
Au contraire, I can't think of a single person who will watch this week's 75th anniversary of the Battle of Britain and think - "time to move on from this..." We celebrate ultimate sacrifice. That will never, ever go out of fashion.
Maybe Jezza can get Gerry Adams to stand in for him at the Cenotaph.
Are you one of the 4%?
SINN Féin leader Gerry Adams has once again denied he was ever a member of the IRA - despite being presented with an opinion poll which showed that just 4pc of voters believed him.
I'll stick my neck out here then run for cover ...
Yes I do think it's time to move on from Remembrance Day. I think we should say 'thank you, thank you for sacrificing, thank you for what you did in the cause you were told, and may have believed, was right. We thank you.'
But now it's time to move on. By the way, I know many many people, including Conservative voters, who privately agree with me on this.
Au contraire, I can't think of a single person who will watch this week's 75th anniversary of the Battle of Britain and think - "time to move on from this..." We celebrate ultimate sacrifice. That will never, ever go out of fashion.
Maybe Jezza can get Gerry Adams to stand in for him at the Cenotaph.
LIZA is also connected to Rogerian Pyschotherapy which helps a person to analyse and assess his personality disorder and work on a cure... nowt much more to say really
Putting to one side my own poor efforts, I have to say that this thread has some outstanding contributions. Nowhere else is there the forensic examination and lucid exposition of the current Corbynista mindset - and its impact on Labour's prospects - as set out in these posts. An excellent thread, better than any of the writing I've seen on the subject in the main stream media.
Plus it has reference to the Whore of Babylon. All for free. Bargain.
I don't recall triumphalism in the people of Wootton Bassett who turned out spontaneously to show their respects to the dead servicemen and women whose remains were repatriated through their small town......that is the way British people commemorate their dead....not the triumphalist feverish imaginings of some of the serial haters on here.
it's very easy to pull a specific example like that, and make an emotional appeal like that. As it is, even J.Corbyn agrees that the death of servicemen and women in Afghanistan is a tragedy. You don't have to be a serial hater to be doubtful about the current trend of ostentatious support for our troops, which is certainly more exaggerated in the US – hopefully it won't reach the same feverish level in the UK
Hallo, Plato. I am in Japan, though I guess I consume primarily UK media, and I have actually visited the USA more often than the UK of late.
For me, and I think a lot of people on here miss this, the importance of Corbyn is not whether he can win a General Election. I frankly don't really care. He might become PM before 2020 by dint of parliamentary problems, but it remains unlikely.
No, the real importance is to pull British political discourse not just left but out of the Murdoch media lock and he's already done it. We're debating things on here and in the country that have been largely untouched for twenty years. We are starting to face up to issues in both domestic and international policy that were taken as no-go's. It's a sea change, a shift in zeitgeist, that is ultimately very, very, good for the future.
Have to agree, millions of people in Scotland registered to vote in the referendum last year, both to vote either Yes or No. For (too) many it was the first time they had put pencil to ballot paper.
It has become habit forming as they, the new voters, have realised that they can make a difference.
Even now, political debate continues. Large meetings at local levels are now the norm, as people realise that knowing the latest twists in the story lines of Eastenders, Coronation Street or up here, River City, is not the be all of human existence.
What, it seems to us in Scotland, that there are too many in the Westminster Bubble who haven't realised that there are many people in England, Wales and I suspect, due to the recent shenanigans, a growing number in Northern Ireland who have seen what is happening here and it's giving them food for thought.
A new consensus is occurring, and if the present elites don't change, then they will go, as did the establishment parties in Scotland at the last GE. That the SNP are now considering themselves as established should also start to be considered by themselves.
And rituals - such as Remembrance Sunday - do matter. There are rituals all over the place in every society and they answer to some deep human need. Pouring scorn on them is very destructive, one reason I think why revolutionaries are so fond of destroying ancient rituals and their commemorative sites.
but the importance of the ritual seems to have been amplified in recent years. -perhaps because of the foxification of the news media. perhaps it started with Michael Foot's jacket.
Now every weatherman has to wear a poppy or face synthetic outrage. I don't think it has always been like that
There's nothing more tedious than the annual fatwahs issued by the poppy mullahs. I try to avoid the 'why our grandfathers fought' generalisations (multiple reasons & motives, often contradictory being the only sensible answer), but I'm bloody sure it wasn't so the colour of a bit of paper worn on lapels could be prescribed, or proscribed.
I think a bit more reconciliation at these occasions might be in order. To be parochial, I thought the Edinburgh remembrance ceremony last year that invited the crew of a visiting German frigate to attend was a fine thing.
These get togethers happen a lot and not just there. The Afrika Corps have one in Germany and guests are the opposing forces. Lots of beer is drunk and old comrades remembered from both sides. Bismark association has one and so on and so on.
And my next one before I, literally, run: the future of humanity does not lie in nationhood ...
The future of humanity does not lie in cheesy soundbites ...
Well I can flesh it out for you, if you'd rather then? The concept of 'Britain' means less to me than the concept of shared humanity. I do love London, very much, because it encapsulates that cosmopolitan life that I, and many of my friends, encounter whenever I travel the world, which is frequently. I find more in common with other human beings from a range of diverse cultures and 'countries' than I do in the artificial concept of a national identity. In the case of the UK we are, and have always been, a hotch potch of racial and ethnic identities. 'Britishness' and 'nationhood' are not identity markers that give me particular pride any more. I look for, and find, shared humanity.
If 'we' have ideals that matter to me they are the belief in tolerance and democracy, ideals that I find under threat not from Corbyn but from Cameron. Henry G Manson put it all very well yesterday: a crushing of the only thing left that makes Britain worth its Britishness.
Maybe you should spend less time travelling the world and a bit more time travelling the country in which you live.
And my next one before I, literally, run: the future of humanity does not lie in nationhood ...
The future of humanity does not lie in cheesy soundbites ...
Well I can flesh it out for you, if you'd rather then? The concept of 'Britain' means less to me than the concept of shared humanity. I do love London, very much, because it encapsulates that cosmopolitan life that I, and many of my friends, encounter whenever I travel the world, which is frequently. I find more in common with other human beings from a range of diverse cultures and 'countries' than I do in the artificial concept of a national identity. In the case of the UK we are, and have always been, a hotch potch of racial and ethnic identities. 'Britishness' and 'nationhood' are not identity markers that give me particular pride any more. I look for, and find, shared humanity.
If 'we' have ideals that matter to me they are the belief in tolerance and democracy, ideals that I find under threat not from Corbyn but from Cameron. Henry G Manson put it all very well yesterday: a crushing of the only thing left that makes Britain worth its Britishness.
Maybe you should spend less time travelling the world and a bit more time travelling the country in which you live.
And my next one before I, literally, run: the future of humanity does not lie in nationhood ...
The future of humanity does not lie in cheesy soundbites ...
Well I can flesh it out for you, if you'd rather then? The concept of 'Britain' means less to me than the concept of shared humanity. I do love London, very much, because it encapsulates that cosmopolitan life that I, and many of my friends, encounter whenever I travel the world, which is frequently. I find more in common with other human beings from a range of diverse cultures and 'countries' than I do in the artificial concept of a national identity. In the case of the UK we are, and have always been, a hotch potch of racial and ethnic identities. 'Britishness' and 'nationhood' are not identity markers that give me particular pride any more. I look for, and find, shared humanity.
If 'we' have ideals that matter to me they are the belief in tolerance and democracy, ideals that I find under threat not from Corbyn but from Cameron. Henry G Manson put it all very well yesterday: a crushing of the only thing left that makes Britain worth its Britishness.
Maybe you should spend less time travelling the world and a bit more time travelling the country in which you live.
You're assuming that they live in the UK...
It's clear from Estobar's comments that (s)he is in the UK, probably in London.
For me, and I think a lot of people on here miss this, the importance of Corbyn is not whether he can win a General Election. I frankly don't really care. He might become PM before 2020 by dint of parliamentary problems, but it remains unlikely.
No, the real importance is to pull British political discourse not just left but out of the Murdoch media lock and he's already done it. We're debating things on here and in the country that have been largely untouched for twenty years. We are starting to face up to issues in both domestic and international policy that were taken as no-go's. It's a sea change, a shift in zeitgeist, that is ultimately very, very, good for the future.
Which is exactly why the Tories should not accede to it. In the 1980s exactly this sort of thing happened with Foot, and this left wing extremism allowed Thatcher to govern from the Right and still win three election victories. When Labour eventually had to face electoral reality, it meant they have to shift so much further.
I think for this parliamentary term, we should look to do all the things we want to do but would often be scared to. We can get rid of the licence fee, scrap the Human Rights Act and opt out of the ECHR, make tax allowances (and lower rates) transferable for married couples, charge market rents for the non-poor in council housing and plenty more. Once the reforms are made, we can go back to a no-scaring-of-horses approach after 2020. Labour will then have to return to the new consensus that we have set through three election victories.
And my next one before I, literally, run: the future of humanity does not lie in nationhood ...
The future of humanity does not lie in cheesy soundbites ...
Well I can flesh it out for you, if you'd rather then? The concept of 'Britain' means less to me than the concept of shared humanity. I do love London, very much, because it encapsulates that cosmopolitan life that I, and many of my friends, encounter whenever I travel the world, which is frequently. I find more in common with other human beings from a range of diverse cultures and 'countries' than I do in the artificial concept of a national identity. In the case of the UK we are, and have always been, a hotch potch of racial and ethnic identities. 'Britishness' and 'nationhood' are not identity markers that give me particular pride any more. I look for, and find, shared humanity.
If 'we' have ideals that matter to me they are the belief in tolerance and democracy, ideals that I find under threat not from Corbyn but from Cameron. Henry G Manson put it all very well yesterday: a crushing of the only thing left that makes Britain worth its Britishness.
I fecking despair. I really want a Labour party that I can vote for, as a non-London, white, middle aged, heterosexual, married Englishman. You don't want me in your party, do you?
What makes travel interesting (for me at any rate) is to encounter peoples, cultures, and histories that are very clearly different from one's own. When I go abroad, I don't think they're all the same as us.
Exactly. The diversity of the world's nations, traditions, cultures, languages and religions is what makes it interesting. Incidentally, that includes England's Englishness which tends to be discounted in any global cultural analysis by the Left.
The naivety of the Left is astonishing. They think that by banning religion, culture and nations they will unleash some hitherto repressed enlightenment that innately lies within all human beings and we will all move to a higher, purer form of existence.
In reality, doing so requires repression of our most human social bonds and unleashes a truly dark side of control in order to overcome it, which is devoid of any comfort or empathy, where people are desperately unhappy, bored, unfulfilled, and not free to express themselves.
If the Trade Union Bill passes quickly and without major alterations the group that will benefit most from this is the Progress/NewLabour/Blairites (PNLB) group.
I would be far more likely to vote Labour if the Unions were not involved with the party. They should stick to employment matters and leave politics alone. At this point I just regard Labour as a front for the Unions and I regard the leaders of some of the biggest Unions as being a few sandwiches short of a picnic in terms of good old common sense.
I don't recall triumphalism in the people of Wootton Bassett who turned out spontaneously to show their respects to the dead servicemen and women whose remains were repatriated through their small town......that is the way British people commemorate their dead....not the triumphalist feverish imaginings of some of the serial haters on here.
it's very easy to pull a specific example like that, and make an emotional appeal like that. As it is, even J.Corbyn agrees that the death of servicemen and women in Afghanistan is a tragedy. You don't have to be a serial hater to be doubtful about the current trend of ostentatious support for our troops, which is certainly more exaggerated in the US – hopefully it won't reach the same feverish level in the UK
Hallo, Plato. I am in Japan, though I guess I consume primarily UK media, and I have actually visited the USA more often than the UK of late.
For me, and I think a lot of people on here miss this, the importance of Corbyn is not whether he can win a General Election. I frankly don't really care. He might become PM before 2020 by dint of parliamentary problems, but it remains unlikely.
No, the real importance is to pull British political discourse not just left but out of the Murdoch media lock and he's already done it. We're debating things on here and in the country that have been largely untouched for twenty years. We are starting to face up to issues in both domestic and international policy that were taken as no-go's. It's a sea change, a shift in zeitgeist, that is ultimately very, very, good for the future.
Which is exactly why the Tories should not accede to it. In the 1980s exactly this sort of thing happened with Foot, and this left wing extremism allowed Thatcher to govern from the Right and still win three election victories. When Labour eventually had to face electoral reality, it meant they have to shift so much further.
I think for this parliamentary term, we should look to do all the things we want to do but would often be scared to. We can get rid of the licence fee, scrap the Human Rights Act and opt out of the ECHR, make tax allowances (and lower rates) transferable for married couples, charge market rents for the non-poor in council housing and plenty more. Once the reforms are made, we can go back to a no-scaring-of-horses approach after 2020. Labour will then have to return to the new consensus that we have set through three election victories.
The government's majority isn't big enough to do too much big stuff, especially if Labour doesn't further fall apart.
I think the Conservatives need to just show that they are competent governors in the true small-c conservative mode: implement slow, thoughtful and gradual change to improve the country.
Well-considered gradual change would contrast even more with Corbyn's big-shift policies.
And my next one before I, literally, run: the future of humanity does not lie in nationhood ...
The future of humanity does not lie in cheesy soundbites ...
Well I can flesh it out for you, if you'd rather then? The concept of 'Britain' means less to me than the concept of shared humanity. I do love London, very much, because it encapsulates that cosmopolitan life that I, and many of my friends, encounter whenever I travel the world, which is frequently. I find more in common with other human beings from a range of diverse cultures and 'countries' than I do in the artificial concept of a national identity. In the case of the UK we are, and have always been, a hotch potch of racial and ethnic identities. 'Britishness' and 'nationhood' are not identity markers that give me particular pride any more. I look for, and find, shared humanity.
If 'we' have ideals that matter to me they are the belief in tolerance and democracy, ideals that I find under threat not from Corbyn but from Cameron. Henry G Manson put it all very well yesterday: a crushing of the only thing left that makes Britain worth its Britishness.
I fecking despair. I really want a Labour party that I can vote for, as a non-London, white, middle aged, heterosexual, married Englishman. You don't want me in your party, do you?
What makes travel interesting (for me at any rate) is to encounter peoples, cultures, and histories that are very clearly different from one's own. When I go abroad, I don't think they're all the same as us.
snip
The naivety of the Left is astonishing. They think that by banning religion, culture and nations they will unleash some hitherto repressed enlightenment that innately lies within all human beings and we will all move to a higher, purer form of existence.
snip
But they don't want to lose all those things, just the English culture and nation, and to a certain extent Christianity and the C of E.
And my next one before I, literally, run: the future of humanity does not lie in nationhood ...
The future of humanity does not lie in cheesy soundbites ...
Well I can flesh it out for you, if you'd rather then? The concept of 'Britain' means less to me than the concept of shared humanity. I do love London, very much, because it encapsulates that cosmopolitan life that I, and many of my friends, encounter whenever I travel the world, which is frequently. I find more in common with other human beings from a range of diverse cultures and 'countries' than I do in the artificial concept of a national identity. In the case of the UK we are, and have always been, a hotch potch of racial and ethnic identities. 'Britishness' and 'nationhood' are not identity markers that give me particular pride any more. I look for, and find, shared humanity.
If 'we' have ideals that matter to me they are the belief in tolerance and democracy, ideals that I find under threat not from Corbyn but from Cameron. Henry G Manson put it all very well yesterday: a crushing of the only thing left that makes Britain worth its Britishness.
I fecking despair. I really want a Labour party that I can vote for, as a non-London, white, middle aged, heterosexual, married Englishman. You don't want me in your party, do you?
What makes travel interesting (for me at any rate) is to encounter peoples, cultures, and histories that are very clearly different from one's own. When I go abroad, I don't think they're all the same as us.
snip
The naivety of the Left is astonishing. They think that by banning religion, culture and nations they will unleash some hitherto repressed enlightenment that innately lies within all human beings and we will all move to a higher, purer form of existence.
snip
But they don't want to lose all those things, just the English culture and nation, and to a certain extent Christianity and the C of E.
PLP meeting sounds fun... no wonder there wasn't any desk banging
Labour MPs have confronted Jeremy Corbyn and demanded assurances over his defence and economic policies following his shambolic shadow cabinet reshuffle.
In a “hostile” meeting of the Parliamentary Labour Party, dozens of MPs challenged their new leader to rule out opposing the Trident nuclear deterrent, campaigning for Britain to leave the EU and pulling out of Nato.
In unprecedented scenes for a new Labour leader, Mr Corbyn was warned by angry MPs that he would only have their loyalty if he did not cross a number of “red lines”.
He was heavily criticised over his new shadow cabinet and was accused of having a “women problem” after failing to appoint any females to the most senior positions.
For me, and I think a lot of people on here miss this, the importance of Corbyn is not whether he can win a General Election. I frankly don't really care. He might become PM before 2020 by dint of parliamentary problems, but it remains unlikely.
No, the real importance is to pull British political discourse not just left but out of the Murdoch media lock and he's already done it. We're debating things on here and in the country that have been largely untouched for twenty years. We are starting to face up to issues in both domestic and international policy that were taken as no-go's. It's a sea change, a shift in zeitgeist, that is ultimately very, very, good for the future.
Which is exactly why the Tories should not accede to it. In the 1980s exactly this sort of thing happened with Foot, and this left wing extremism allowed Thatcher to govern from the Right and still win three election victories. When Labour eventually had to face electoral reality, it meant they have to shift so much further.
I think for this parliamentary term, we should look to do all the things we want to do but would often be scared to. We can get rid of the licence fee, scrap the Human Rights Act and opt out of the ECHR, make tax allowances (and lower rates) transferable for married couples, charge market rents for the non-poor in council housing and plenty more. Once the reforms are made, we can go back to a no-scaring-of-horses approach after 2020. Labour will then have to return to the new consensus that we have set through three election victories.
Lets not get carried away just because Estobar is living in 'cloud cuckoo land' but you are right in the principle of what you say.
They'll be outlawing pornographic holodeck simulations next.
Edited extra bit: "She believes that they reinforce traditional stereotypes of women and the view that a relationship need be nothing more than physical."
Ahem. Worth reminding people which gender currently spends more (by miles) on sex toys.
This bizarre view that men have a depraved sex drive and women are pure and virtuous is... well, demented.
I'm rather more worried about autonomous killing machines, to be honest.
And my next one before I, literally, run: the future of humanity does not lie in nationhood ...
The future of humanity does not lie in cheesy soundbites ...
Well I can flesh it out for you, if you'd rather then? The concept of 'Britain' means less to me than the concept of shared humanity. I do love London, very much, because it encapsulates that cosmopolitan life that I, and many of my friends, encounter whenever I travel the world, which is frequently. I find more in common with other human beings from a range of diverse cultures and 'countries' than I do in the artificial concept of a national identity. In the case of the UK we are, and have always been, a hotch potch of racial and ethnic identities. 'Britishness' and 'nationhood' are not identity markers that give me particular pride any more. I look for, and find, shared humanity.
If 'we' have ideals that matter to me they are the belief in tolerance and democracy, ideals that I find under threat not from Corbyn but from Cameron. Henry G Manson put it all very well yesterday: a crushing of the only thing left that makes Britain worth its Britishness.
I fecking despair. I really want a Labour party that I can vote for, as a non-London, white, middle aged, heterosexual, married Englishman. You don't want me in your party, do you?
What makes travel interesting (for me at any rate) is to encounter peoples, cultures, and histories that are very clearly different from one's own. When I go abroad, I don't think they're all the same as us.
snip
The naivety of the Left is astonishing. They think that by banning religion, culture and nations they will unleash some hitherto repressed enlightenment that innately lies within all human beings and we will all move to a higher, purer form of existence.
snip
But they don't want to lose all those things, just the English culture and nation, and to a certain extent Christianity and the C of E.
If the Trade Union Bill passes quickly and without major alterations the group that will benefit most from this is the Progress/NewLabour/Blairites (PNLB) group.
I would be far more likely to vote Labour if the Unions were not involved with the party. They should stick to employment matters and leave politics alone. At this point I just regard Labour as a front for the Unions and I regard the leaders of some of the biggest Unions as being a few sandwiches short of a picnic in terms of good old common sense.
The unions should ask all members which parties they want to support on a year-by-year basis, and split the political levy accordingly. For instance if half the members voted for Labour, a third for the Lib Dems, etc, then that year's levy would be split between those parties in that ratio.
This would mean that: *) parties other than Labour would have to try to attract and interact with unions and their members instead of the antagonism that currently exists.
*) Labour would not be seen as being in-hock to the unions, and it would help remove the evil influence of Unite within the party.
*) people who are put off being in a union because of their links to Labour would feel able to (re)join.
*) It would remove a barrier to a general reform of party financing.
It's a win-win for everyone, including Labour. Sadly this will not happen for the obvious reasons.
The naivety of the Left is astonishing. They think that by banning religion, culture and nations they will unleash some hitherto repressed enlightenment that innately lies within all human beings and we will all move to a higher, purer form of existence.
snip
But they don't want to lose all those things, just the English culture and nation, and to a certain extent Christianity and the C of E.
These caricatures of "the left" are no more accurate than "baby-eating tories".
And my next one before I, literally, run: the future of humanity does not lie in nationhood ...
The future of humanity does not lie in cheesy soundbites ...
Well I can flesh it out for you, if you'd rather then? The concept of 'Britain' means less to me than the concept of shared humanity. I do love London, very much, because it encapsulates that cosmopolitan life that I, and many of my friends, encounter whenever I travel the world, which is frequently. I find more in common with other human beings from a range of diverse cultures and 'countries' than I do in the artificial concept of a national identity. In the case of the UK we are, and have always been, a hotch potch of racial and ethnic identities. 'Britishness' and 'nationhood' are not identity markers that give me particular pride any more. I look for, and find, shared humanity.
If 'we' have ideals that matter to me they are the belief in tolerance and democracy, ideals that I find under threat not from Corbyn but from Cameron. Henry G Manson put it all very well yesterday: a crushing of the only thing left that makes Britain worth its Britishness.
I fecking despair. I really want a Labour party that I can vote for, as a non-London, white, middle aged, heterosexual, married Englishman. You don't want me in your party, do you?
Jezza "negotiating" with terrorists (be it IRA, Hezbollah or IS) is a vanity project and a show of support - nothing more. What can he achieve? He speaks for no one but himself. How can he negotiate? What can he offer? "Yes, we agree to everything you want."?
A totally pointless exercise.
But that's Jezza's MO. Demonstrations, and speeches to the converted. Virtue-signalling writ large.
Full of sound and fury (and hot air) and a paper dictator.
Worse, such talks can actually undermine any negotiations that are going on behind the scenes, as they can send an utterly conflicting message from the one the government wishes to send.
He wasn't negotiating. He was agreeing. He wasn't an intermediary. He was a fellow traveller.
There were people who did try and intermediate. And like all such people - for obvious reasons - they were and remain in the shadows. Corbyn is giving us a wholly untrue and boastful account of his non-existent role in a settlement achieved entirely by the hard work of others.
Were I one of the many people involved in that hard work, here and in Northern and Southern Ireland, I would be furious at the way Corbyn has sought to climb on others' shoulders and wrap himself in the flag of peacemaker. People like him were part of the problem not the solution. He is stealing others' achievements. It is utterly dishonest and dishonourable of him and of those who support him in this lie.
I agree he was not negotiating, but that is the way some of his supporters seem to excuse it.
The naivety of the Left is astonishing. They think that by banning religion, culture and nations they will unleash some hitherto repressed enlightenment that innately lies within all human beings and we will all move to a higher, purer form of existence.
snip
But they don't want to lose all those things, just the English culture and nation, and to a certain extent Christianity and the C of E.
These caricatures of "the left" are no more accurate than "baby-eating tories".
In the case of individuals like Matthew Taylor, Jeremy Corbyn, Gerald Kaufman, Andrew Neather, Emily Thornberry, most of our acting establishment and several of our leading left-wing PB posters, it is wholly accurate.
And my next one before I, literally, run: the future of humanity does not lie in nationhood ...
The future of humanity does not lie in cheesy soundbites ...
Well I can flesh it out for you, if you'd rather then? The concept of 'Britain' means less to me than the concept of shared humanity. I do love London, very much, because it encapsulates that cosmopolitan life that I, and many of my friends, encounter whenever I travel the world, which is frequently. I find more in common with other human beings from a range of diverse cultures and 'countries' than I do in the artificial concept of a national identity. In the case of the UK we are, and have always been, a hotch potch of racial and ethnic identities. 'Britishness' and 'nationhood' are not identity markers that give me particular pride any more. I look for, and find, shared humanity.
If 'we' have ideals that matter to me they are the belief in tolerance and democracy, ideals that I find under threat not from Corbyn but from Cameron. Henry G Manson put it all very well yesterday: a crushing of the only thing left that makes Britain worth its Britishness.
I fecking despair. I really want a Labour party that I can vote for, as a non-London, white, middle aged, heterosexual, married Englishman. You don't want me in your party, do you?
The vast majority of the Labour party has just put in a friend of Hamas as leader, who has put in an IRA supporter as shadow Chancellor and appointed an anti-white racist to the shadow cabinet. This is who the Labour party are now.
Trouble is, some pesky folks might ask "And how much lower would that debt have been under Labour? Er, none you say? Hmmm...Higher actually? Well it can't matter that much then, can it?"
The deficit was massive. Whilst it still is, Labour, and others, have complained at its rate of reduction. The only way for debt to fall would be for Osborne to run a small net surplus over the Coalition years [NB not reduce the deficit to zero, as there are interest payments which must be considered].
Packing them in at Edinburgh Uni Labour event - I did a double take at the photo of Kezia on the right - for a minute I thought she was wearing a Corbyn vest:
This from Nick Cohen after the GE is worth a read:
It could not because Labour’s leadership of former special advisers does not look like the people it wants to represent and does not look as if it likes the look of them either. In this, it is typical of the wider educated left in England, which almost alone in the world, makes a virtue of denigrating its own people.
The universities, left press, and the arts characterise the English middle-class as Mail-reading misers, who are sexist, racist and homophobic to boot. Meanwhile, they characterise the white working class as lardy Sun-reading slobs, who are, since you asked, also sexist, racist and homophobic. The national history is reduced to one long imperial crime, and the notion that the English are not such a bad bunch with many strong radical traditions worth preserving is rejected as risibly complacent. So tainted and untrustworthy are they that they must be told what they can say and how they should behave.
Trouble is, some pesky folks might ask "And how much lower would that debt have been under Labour? Er, none you say? Hmmm...Higher actually? Well it can't matter that much then, can it?"
Corbyn and Co wish to increase it further to spare us from 'austerity', so it matters even less.
For me, and I think a lot of people on here miss this, the importance of Corbyn is not whether he can win a General Election. I frankly don't really care. He might become PM before 2020 by dint of parliamentary problems, but it remains unlikely.
No, the real importance is to pull British political discourse not just left but out of the Murdoch media lock and he's already done it. We're debating things on here and in the country that have been largely untouched for twenty years. We are starting to face up to issues in both domestic and international policy that were taken as no-go's. It's a sea change, a shift in zeitgeist, that is ultimately very, very, good for the future.
Which is exactly why the Tories should not accede to it. In the 1980s exactly this sort of thing happened with Foot, and this left wing extremism allowed Thatcher to govern from the Right and still win three election victories. When Labour eventually had to face electoral reality, it meant they have to shift so much further.
I think for this parliamentary term, we should look to do all the things we want to do but would often be scared to. We can get rid of the licence fee, scrap the Human Rights Act and opt out of the ECHR, make tax allowances (and lower rates) transferable for married couples, charge market rents for the non-poor in council housing and plenty more. Once the reforms are made, we can go back to a no-scaring-of-horses approach after 2020. Labour will then have to return to the new consensus that we have set through three election victories.
Lets not get carried away just because Estobar is living in 'cloud cuckoo land' but you are right in the principle of what you say.
All of my examples were things we were tempted to try in the last coalition, when we were expecting 2015 to be a real fight.
The married couples tax system should definitely be focused on. It makes no sense that a married couple each on £40k pay the same level of tax as a married couple with one person on £60k and one on £20k.
Also, the council housing system is the last great unreformed part of the welfare system.
This from Nick Cohen after the GE is worth a read:
It could not because Labour’s leadership of former special advisers does not look like the people it wants to represent and does not look as if it likes the look of them either. In this, it is typical of the wider educated left in England, which almost alone in the world, makes a virtue of denigrating its own people.
The universities, left press, and the arts characterise the English middle-class as Mail-reading misers, who are sexist, racist and homophobic to boot. Meanwhile, they characterise the white working class as lardy Sun-reading slobs, who are, since you asked, also sexist, racist and homophobic. The national history is reduced to one long imperial crime, and the notion that the English are not such a bad bunch with many strong radical traditions worth preserving is rejected as risibly complacent. So tainted and untrustworthy are they that they must be told what they can say and how they should behave.
It may already have been mentioned earlier but just in case anyone is interested the Telegraph are running a 'live' commentary on the 15th September 1940 Battle of Britain just as they did for Waterloo earlier in the summer.
My attitudes to Remembrance Sunday and the associated pomp etc have changed as have the thoughts associated with it. As a student and in my twenties, I thought it out of date and irrelevant (this was in the 1960s). My father fought in Burma, was injured and never ever discussed the war - it was quite traumatic. My mother remembered the bombing (she lived in London) and rationing - and would discuss that. (she was a butcher's daughter and went to school in wellies - she had no shoes.
As I grew older and either wiser or dumber, I realised the levels of sacrifice and austerity (real austerity not the modern version which is risible) that people endured bot during 6 years of war and at least 6 years after the war ended.
So I suspect it unlikely many of those over 55 are likely to let it be forgotten...
Trouble is, some pesky folks might ask "And how much lower would that debt have been under Labour? Er, none you say? Hmmm...Higher actually? Well it can't matter that much then, can it?"
Corbyn and Co wish to increase it further to spare us from 'austerity', so it matters even less.
Re Corbyn, the polling yesterday put down a marker of hostility from the 55+ age groups. He didn't appear to be rated very highly by them, and as OGH keeps saying these cohorts vote.
A fair proportion of these groups in the South will remember Corbyn's support for the IRA, and other unpopular causes, (not with affection).
Be interested to see how he polls in the Midlands with those who remember the Birmingham pub bombings. (The next election campaign will no doubt refresh their memory ....)
More likely to vote Labour with Corbyn Leader (net)
South: -7 Mid/Wales: -10 North/Scot: -2
Thanks. Good job there are no marginals for Labour to lose in Wales and the Midlands then.
Oh....
If you look at Lab's top 50 defence seats by region (up to Hyndburn with a maj of 4400) they break down as follows
North - 17 (Chester, Wirral W, Halifax, Barrow, Dewsbury, Lancaster, Mboro S, Wakefield, Copeland, Hartlepool, Darlington, Bpool S, Burnley, Scunthorpe, Chorley, B Auckland, Hyndburn) Midlands - 10 (Newcastle-U-L, Wolves SW, NE Derbys, Walsall N, Bham Northfield, Gedling, Stoke S, Bham Edgbaston, Cov S, Cov NW London - 10 (Ealing, Brentford, Ilford, Hampstead, Enfield, Harrow W, Westminster N, Tooting, Eltham, Bermondsey Wales - 7 (Ynys Mon, Bridgend, Wrexham, Clwyd S, Delyn, Alyn, Newport W South - 5 (Cambridge, Hove, Bristol E, Soton Test, Bristol W Scotland - 1(Edinburgh S)
Re Corbyn, the polling yesterday put down a marker of hostility from the 55+ age groups. He didn't appear to be rated very highly by them, and as OGH keeps saying these cohorts vote.
A fair proportion of these groups in the South will remember Corbyn's support for the IRA, and other unpopular causes, (not with affection).
Be interested to see how he polls in the Midlands with those who remember the Birmingham pub bombings. (The next election campaign will no doubt refresh their memory ....)
More likely to vote Labour with Corbyn Leader (net)
South: -7 Mid/Wales: -10 North/Scot: -2
Thanks. Good job there are no marginals for Labour to lose in Wales and the Midlands then.
Oh....
If you look at Lab's top 50 defence seats by region (up to Hyndburn with a maj of 4400) they break down as follows
North - 17 (Chester, Wirral W, Halifax, Barrow, Dewsbury, Lancaster, Mboro S, Wakefield, Copeland, Hartlepool, Darlington, Bpool S, Burnley, Scunthorpe, Chorley, B Auckland, Hyndburn) Midlands - 10 (Newcastle-U-L, Wolves SW, NE Derbys, Walsall N, Bham Northfield, Gedling, Stoke S, Bham Edgbaston, Cov S, Cov NW London - 10 (Ealing, Brentford, Ilford, Hampstead, Enfield, Harrow W, Westminster N, Tooting, Eltham, Bermondsey Wales - 7 (Ynys Mon, Bridgend, Wrexham, Clwyd S, Delyn, Alyn, Newport W South - 5 (Cambridge, Hove, Bristol E, Soton Test, Bristol W Scotland - 1(Edinburgh S)
Interesting article which reveals more about Labour’s predicament IMO than dear old Polly realises. Something must be amiss, rarely have I seen her attempt to polish the same old turd with so little enthusiasm or conviction.
I didn't get Remembrance services when I was a kid, it meant nothing to me. Then a friend went off to serve in the Falklands and the penny dropped.
It wasn't old-fogies in hats anymore talking about people I'd never known - it was immediate and personal. I imagine that the perceived increase in media attention that it gets is down to much better communications from the RBL, and GW1/2 plus Afghanistan deployments.
My attitudes to Remembrance Sunday and the associated pomp etc have changed as have the thoughts associated with it. As a student and in my twenties, I thought it out of date and irrelevant (this was in the 1960s). My father fought in Burma, was injured and never ever discussed the war - it was quite traumatic. My mother remembered the bombing (she lived in London) and rationing - and would discuss that. (she was a butcher's daughter and went to school in wellies - she had no shoes.
As I grew older and either wiser or dumber, I realised the levels of sacrifice and austerity (real austerity not the modern version which is risible) that people endured bot during 6 years of war and at least 6 years after the war ended.
So I suspect it unlikely many of those over 55 are likely to let it be forgotten...
Looking at that picture it seems very clear that Osborne has dramatically curbed the growth in debt and will begin paying it down this parliament.
Look at the red bit, not the pink bit, and you will see Osborne has done no such thing.
And this is my complaint about Labour under Miliband -- they should have been publishing graphs like this, not keeping schtum while Osborne lectured voters on household economics.
Interesting article which reveals more about Labour’s predicament IMO than dear old Polly realises. Something must be amiss, rarely have I seen her attempt to polish the same old turd with so little enthusiasm or conviction.
"Look at the red bit, not the pink bit, and you will see Osborne has done no such thing."
Compare the slopes before and after the first black line.
Anyway, I'm not sure any attack on this line works as half of it just reminds people who put us in this position in the first place. In fact, this is why Labour avoided this line, they knew it was suicidal.
Let the activists and know-nothings play around with figures they don't understand.
Trouble is, some pesky folks might ask "And how much lower would that debt have been under Labour? Er, none you say? Hmmm...Higher actually? Well it can't matter that much then, can it?"
Even if people did say that, then whether right or wrong, it neutralises a Tory attack line.
"Look at the red bit, not the pink bit, and you will see Osborne has done no such thing."
Compare the slopes before and after the first black line.
Anyway, I'm not sure any attack on this line works as half of it just reminds people who put us in this position in the first place. In fact, this is why Labour avoided this line, they knew it was suicidal.
Let the activists and know-nothings play around with figures they don't understand.
Not at all -- the Labour version would have had an extra black line marked "global financial crisis" or some such.
And rituals - such as Remembrance Sunday - do matter. There are rituals all over the place in every society and they answer to some deep human need. Pouring scorn on them is very destructive, one reason I think why revolutionaries are so fond of destroying ancient rituals and their commemorative sites.
but the importance of the ritual seems to have been amplified in recent years. -perhaps because of the foxification of the news media. perhaps it started with Michael Foot's jacket.
Now every weatherman has to wear a poppy or face synthetic outrage. I don't think it has always been like that
There's nothing more tedious than the annual fatwahs issued by the poppy mullahs. I try to avoid the 'why our grandfathers fought' generalisations (multiple reasons & motives, often contradictory being the only sensible answer), but I'm bloody sure it wasn't so the colour of a bit of paper worn on lapels could be prescribed, or proscribed.
I think a bit more reconciliation at these occasions might be in order. To be parochial, I thought the Edinburgh remembrance ceremony last year that invited the crew of a visiting German frigate to attend was a fine thing.
These get togethers happen a lot and not just there. The Afrika Corps have one in Germany and guests are the opposing forces. Lots of beer is drunk and old comrades remembered from both sides. Bismark association has one and so on and so on.
It has been happening for many years.
I didn't watch the Cenotaph ceremony last year. Were there many German, Italian and/or Japanese units taking part in the march?
Trouble is, some pesky folks might ask "And how much lower would that debt have been under Labour? Er, none you say? Hmmm...Higher actually? Well it can't matter that much then, can it?"
Even if people did say that, then whether right or wrong, it neutralises a Tory attack line.
It's *Labour's* attack line and we're discussing why its been neutered at birth.
"Look at the red bit, not the pink bit, and you will see Osborne has done no such thing."
Compare the slopes before and after the first black line.
Anyway, I'm not sure any attack on this line works as half of it just reminds people who put us in this position in the first place. In fact, this is why Labour avoided this line, they knew it was suicidal.
Let the activists and know-nothings play around with figures they don't understand.
Indeed, it's a handy graph to show that Labour tripled the debt from about 2001 onwards, and then Brown really let rip in 2009. So much for Prudence.
I don't think anyone voting Labour will be "shy". But pollsters will have their work cut out for a different reason.
How would they take into account those who did not vote in 2015 and 2010 or ever but now says they will vote Labour ? Their systems will far more easily capture the opposite drift.
Not at all -- the Labour version would have had an extra black line marked "global financial crisis" or some such.
Yeah and the Tories will point out the debt going up (nominally and as fraction of GDP) between 2001 and 2007 despite a so called economic boom. The only time it was going down was the few years when Brown stuck to Tory spending plans.
Looking at that picture it seems very clear that Osborne has dramatically curbed the growth in debt and will begin paying it down this parliament.
And this is my complaint about Labour under Miliband -- they should have been publishing graphs like this, not keeping schtum while Osborne lectured voters on household economics.
But it directly contradicts their 'too far too fast' attack line......
I saw something remarkable on Sky paper review this morning - two regular pundits were against accepting migrants willy nilly. They were mainly young men, we didn't know who they were, where were their families and parents? We've got the right idea in the country, Germany has made a mess of it.
I wonder if PB will take to Frankie Boyle's latest piece as much as they did with his recent incineration of the Labour leadership farrago?
'Cameron won’t take refugees who have reached Europe – like there’s a humanitarian offside rule
David Cameron visited a refugee camp in Lebanon on Monday. Our prime minister, a man who can normally muster all the moral authority of Roman Polanski’s penis, has discovered his soul. Amazing what a three-week break away from parliament can do. It only took David Cameron six years to finally come out and take a moral stand, and all it took was the death of one toddler. You may call the Tories’ glacial crawl towards respecting human life a political and personal train crash. I call it compassion.'
Re Corbyn, the polling yesterday put down a marker of hostility from the 55+ age groups. He didn't appear to be rated very highly by them, and as OGH keeps saying these cohorts vote.
A fair proportion of these groups in the South will remember Corbyn's support for the IRA, and other unpopular causes, (not with affection).
Be interested to see how he polls in the Midlands with those who remember the Birmingham pub bombings. (The next election campaign will no doubt refresh their memory ....)
More likely to vote Labour with Corbyn Leader (net)
South: -7 Mid/Wales: -10 North/Scot: -2
Thanks. Good job there are no marginals for Labour to lose in Wales and the Midlands then.
Oh....
If you look at Lab's top 50 defence seats by region (up to Hyndburn with a maj of 4400) they break down as follows
North - 17 (Chester, Wirral W, Halifax, Barrow, Dewsbury, Lancaster, Mboro S, Wakefield, Copeland, Hartlepool, Darlington, Bpool S, Burnley, Scunthorpe, Chorley, B Auckland, Hyndburn) Midlands - 10 (Newcastle-U-L, Wolves SW, NE Derbys, Walsall N, Bham Northfield, Gedling, Stoke S, Bham Edgbaston, Cov S, Cov NW London - 10 (Ealing, Brentford, Ilford, Hampstead, Enfield, Harrow W, Westminster N, Tooting, Eltham, Bermondsey Wales - 7 (Ynys Mon, Bridgend, Wrexham, Clwyd S, Delyn, Alyn, Newport W South - 5 (Cambridge, Hove, Bristol E, Soton Test, Bristol W Scotland - 1(Edinburgh S)
Tat's really useful, thanks.
50 seats with majorities of under 4,400. This could get really bad for Labour.
Looking at that picture it seems very clear that Osborne has dramatically curbed the growth in debt and will begin paying it down this parliament.
Assuming he sticks to his plans. Remember what he said in 2010 ? By now he would have been repaying the national debt instead of increasing it bt £60bn or so each year.
I saw something remarkable on Sky paper review this morning - two regular pundits were against accepting migrants willy nilly. They were mainly young men, we didn't know who they were, where were their families and parents? We've got the right idea in the country, Germany has made a mess of it.
Remarkable.
'Two in every 100 Syrian migrants smuggled into Europe are Islamic State-trained fanatics, David Cameron was warned yesterday...'
Looking at that picture it seems very clear that Osborne has dramatically curbed the growth in debt and will begin paying it down this parliament.
And this is my complaint about Labour under Miliband -- they should have been publishing graphs like this, not keeping schtum while Osborne lectured voters on household economics.
But it directly contradicts their 'too far too fast' attack line......
Exactly. The attack here is from the right who thinks Osborne has not been nearly aggressive enough in cutting the budget deficit. Attacks of this nature from Labour, who want to spend more and cut less, just sound silly.
I saw something remarkable on Sky paper review this morning - two regular pundits were against accepting migrants willy nilly. They were mainly young men, we didn't know who they were, where were their families and parents? We've got the right idea in the country, Germany has made a mess of it.
Remarkable.
This.
If people are prepared to go on mainstream news and voice opinions that until recently were unspeakable shows how opinion is changing. Corbyn's first act as Leader was to go on a refugee march, he's swimming against the tide.
If the Trade Union Bill passes quickly and without major alterations the group that will benefit most from this is the Progress/NewLabour/Blairites (PNLB) group.
I would be far more likely to vote Labour if the Unions were not involved with the party. They should stick to employment matters and leave politics alone. At this point I just regard Labour as a front for the Unions and I regard the leaders of some of the biggest Unions as being a few sandwiches short of a picnic in terms of good old common sense.
The unions should ask all members which parties they want to support on a year-by-year basis, and split the political levy accordingly. For instance if half the members voted for Labour, a third for the Lib Dems, etc, then that year's levy would be split between those parties in that ratio.
This would mean that: *) parties other than Labour would have to try to attract and interact with unions and their members instead of the antagonism that currently exists.
*) Labour would not be seen as being in-hock to the unions, and it would help remove the evil influence of Unite within the party.
*) people who are put off being in a union because of their links to Labour would feel able to (re)join.
*) It would remove a barrier to a general reform of party financing.
It's a win-win for everyone, including Labour. Sadly this will not happen for the obvious reasons.
The loud left are as pertinent to modern Britain as blacksmiths. No wonder their protests are increasingly ugly. They react with furious disbelief at the result of a democratic election. They rave about balancing the nation's books as if it was like drowning kittens in a sack. They scream in our faces about their own compassion while bandying around epithets like "scum" and "filth" with the vicious abandon of Nazis talking about Jews.
So how are the Tories morally inferior to this shower?
Which is a LOT better than £160 billion a year, or even worse and whatever it might have reached if Brown had had his way and appointed Ed Balls as CotE.
Looking at that picture it seems very clear that Osborne has dramatically curbed the growth in debt and will begin paying it down this parliament.
And this is my complaint about Labour under Miliband -- they should have been publishing graphs like this, not keeping schtum while Osborne lectured voters on household economics.
But it directly contradicts their 'too far too fast' attack line......
No it doesn't. Deficit can increase in two ways:
1. More spending [ this is where Osborne cut savagely ]
2. Growth and hence tax receipts, Here, he did horribly badly. Only since 2014, did it begin to pick up slightly.
Keeping a tight rein on spending does not necessarily ensure reduction of the deficit if tax receipts do not increase.
My attitudes to Remembrance Sunday and the associated pomp etc have changed as have the thoughts associated with it. As a student and in my twenties, I thought it out of date and irrelevant (this was in the 1960s). My father fought in Burma, was injured and never ever discussed the war - it was quite traumatic. My mother remembered the bombing (she lived in London) and rationing - and would discuss that. (she was a butcher's daughter and went to school in wellies - she had no shoes.
As I grew older and either wiser or dumber, I realised the levels of sacrifice and austerity (real austerity not the modern version which is risible) that people endured bot during 6 years of war and at least 6 years after the war ended.
So I suspect it unlikely many of those over 55 are likely to let it be forgotten...
As a Boy Scout in the early 50’s we were expected to parade at the Remembrance Sunday service, where the local British Legion chairrman used to read out the names of the local men killed in the two wars. There was always a catch in his voice when he read the names of two of his sons. And my mother and aunt kept alive the memory of their elder brother who died in Flanders in 1918.
Re Corbyn, the polling yesterday put down a marker of hostility from the 55+ age groups. He didn't appear to be rated very highly by them, and as OGH keeps saying these cohorts vote.
A fair proportion of these groups in the South will remember Corbyn's support for the IRA, and other unpopular causes, (not with affection).
Be interested to see how he polls in the Midlands with those who remember the Birmingham pub bombings. (The next election campaign will no doubt refresh their memory ....)
More likely to vote Labour with Corbyn Leader (net)
South: -7 Mid/Wales: -10 North/Scot: -2
Thanks. Good job there are no marginals for Labour to lose in Wales and the Midlands then.
Oh....
If you look at Lab's top 50 defence seats by region (up to Hyndburn with a maj of 4400) they break down as follows
North - 17 (Chester, Wirral W, Halifax, Barrow, Dewsbury, Lancaster, Mboro S, Wakefield, Copeland, Hartlepool, Darlington, Bpool S, Burnley, Scunthorpe, Chorley, B Auckland, Hyndburn) Midlands - 10 (Newcastle-U-L, Wolves SW, NE Derbys, Walsall N, Bham Northfield, Gedling, Stoke S, Bham Edgbaston, Cov S, Cov NW London - 10 (Ealing, Brentford, Ilford, Hampstead, Enfield, Harrow W, Westminster N, Tooting, Eltham, Bermondsey Wales - 7 (Ynys Mon, Bridgend, Wrexham, Clwyd S, Delyn, Alyn, Newport W South - 5 (Cambridge, Hove, Bristol E, Soton Test, Bristol W Scotland - 1(Edinburgh S)
Tat's really useful, thanks.
50 seats with majorities of under 4,400. This could get really bad for Labour.
Isn't this all up for grabs though? Cam is planning a reduction to 600 seats.
Looking at that picture it seems very clear that Osborne has dramatically curbed the growth in debt and will begin paying it down this parliament.
The problem with this graph is it is looking at the wrong measure. No one can start to reduce the debt until they have got rid of the deficit. Until the point at which the budget is in surplus, graphs of debt are pointless. Nelson should be concentrating on the deficit graph and the only real measure of who should be trusted with the economy should be to compare how the deficit has been cut during Osborne's tenure with how it would have been cut - or, I suspect, would have continued to rise - under Labour.
It only took David Cameron six years to finally come out and take a moral stand, and all it took was the death of one toddler
So why have we been outspending the rest of the EU on refugee camps in Turkey/Lebanon/Jordan for each of the last three years? Or does Mr Boyle favour grandstanding Angela 'opps! Close the borders!' Merkel?
Beeb ticker stating that Paul Kenny of the GMB is saying that they, and Labour, could campaign to leave the EU 'if workers rights are negotiated away', which is an interesting move. Presumably the intention is to put pressure on Cameron to therefore not do so. I'm not sure that will work.
If this is where union thinking is going, Out should be favourite by some way.
One of them even said that when they'd expressed views like this before - they'd been called horrible names. Clearly they are feeling more confident after the clusterfuck in Germany
I saw something remarkable on Sky paper review this morning - two regular pundits were against accepting migrants willy nilly. They were mainly young men, we didn't know who they were, where were their families and parents? We've got the right idea in the country, Germany has made a mess of it.
Remarkable.
This.
If people are prepared to go on mainstream news and voice opinions that until recently were unspeakable shows how opinion is changing. Corbyn's first act as Leader was to go on a refugee march, he's swimming against the tide.
Re Corbyn, the polling yesterday put down a marker of hostility from the 55+ age groups. He didn't appear to be rated very highly by them, and as OGH keeps saying these cohorts vote.
A fair proportion of these groups in the South will remember Corbyn's support for the IRA, and other unpopular causes, (not with affection).
Be interested to see how he polls in the Midlands with those who remember the Birmingham pub bombings. (The next election campaign will no doubt refresh their memory ....)
More likely to vote Labour with Corbyn Leader (net)
South: -7 Mid/Wales: -10 North/Scot: -2
Thanks. Good job there are no marginals for Labour to lose in Wales and the Midlands then.
Oh....
If you look at Lab's top 50 defence seats by region (up to Hyndburn with a maj of 4400) they break down as follows
North - 17 (Chester, Wirral W, Halifax, Barrow, Dewsbury, Lancaster, Mboro S, Wakefield, Copeland, Hartlepool, Darlington, Bpool S, Burnley, Scunthorpe, Chorley, B Auckland, Hyndburn) Midlands - 10 (Newcastle-U-L, Wolves SW, NE Derbys, Walsall N, Bham Northfield, Gedling, Stoke S, Bham Edgbaston, Cov S, Cov NW London - 10 (Ealing, Brentford, Ilford, Hampstead, Enfield, Harrow W, Westminster N, Tooting, Eltham, Bermondsey Wales - 7 (Ynys Mon, Bridgend, Wrexham, Clwyd S, Delyn, Alyn, Newport W South - 5 (Cambridge, Hove, Bristol E, Soton Test, Bristol W Scotland - 1(Edinburgh S)
Tat's really useful, thanks.
50 seats with majorities of under 4,400. This could get really bad for Labour.
Cambridge - Huppert positioning himself for the LD candidate for 2020..
Regarding PMQs tomorrow, I'm pretty sure that Corbyn will come over quite well. He's a better speaker than his two immediate predecessors (not a high bar, admittedly), but also his style is different. I think that, rather than try to come up with some trick question or attack line disguised as a question, he'll play a straight bat and simply ask the kinds of questions he's asked as a backbencher. He's also asked Labour members for suggestions. The topics are likely to be the predictable ones: poverty, inequality, union rights, refugees.
In response, Cameron is likely to have a fairly easy task brushing aside the questions, so it's unlikely to be a very illuminating exchange.
Tomorrow obviously will be a session of high drama, but my guess is that, once things have settled down and we've all got used to the bizarre spectacle of a Labour front-bench largely comprised of the long-term malcontents and marginalised of the parliamentary Labour party, it will all become rather dull: predictable questions and predictable, formulaic responses.
There are some rather amusing quotes from union leaders about Corbyn
This made me LOL, it has the reek of What Have We Done about it “I’m honestly shocked at how bad the operation has been for the past 48 hours. I honestly thought [Mr Corbyn] would be better than this.”
Beeb ticker stating that Paul Kenny of the GMB is saying that they, and Labour, could campaign to leave the EU 'if workers rights are negotiated away', which is an interesting move. Presumably the intention is to put pressure on Cameron to therefore not do so. I'm not sure that will work.
If this is where union thinking is going, Out should be favourite by some way.
Beeb ticker stating that Paul Kenny of the GMB is saying that they, and Labour, could campaign to leave the EU 'if workers rights are negotiated away', which is an interesting move. Presumably the intention is to put pressure on Cameron to therefore not do so. I'm not sure that will work.
If this is where union thinking is going, Out should be favourite by some way.
I have been saying this for a while now. There is little about the EU that is appealing to the Corbyn-left and the unions. Throw in UKIP supporters and the Tory right and you have a very broad - and motivated - "Out" coalition, even if it is only an informal one. "In" cannot match the passion or the depth of convinced support that "Out" has. The only way "In" wins from here is through a campaign based on scare stories. And they would need to be really scary and a lot more convincing than the ones we have heard up to now.
Hungary closes it's borders and declares a crisis due to mass migration. No one has a clue what to do but it is obvious that Merkel is in an impossible position having given false hope to thousands, even millions, and in these circumstances she should resign
One of them even said that when they'd expressed views like this before - they'd been called horrible names. Clearly they are feeling more confident after the clusterfuck in Germany
I saw something remarkable on Sky paper review this morning - two regular pundits were against accepting migrants willy nilly. They were mainly young men, we didn't know who they were, where were their families and parents? We've got the right idea in the country, Germany has made a mess of it.
Remarkable.
This.
If people are prepared to go on mainstream news and voice opinions that until recently were unspeakable shows how opinion is changing. Corbyn's first act as Leader was to go on a refugee march, he's swimming against the tide.
"We need an adult conversation about immigration" "Yes, it needs managing" "Racist"
Re my earlier post, Adrian Cousins seems to be an extreme leftie activist. Couldn't find any obvious link to JC but then I'm an amateur. Did anyone manage to capture the video?
Comments
Plus it has reference to the Whore of Babylon. All for free. Bargain.
It has become habit forming as they, the new voters, have realised that they can make a difference.
Even now, political debate continues. Large meetings at local levels are now the norm, as people realise that knowing the latest twists in the story lines of Eastenders, Coronation Street or up here, River City, is not the be all of human existence.
What, it seems to us in Scotland, that there are too many in the Westminster Bubble who haven't realised that there are many people in England, Wales and I suspect, due to the recent shenanigans, a growing number in Northern Ireland who have seen what is happening here and it's giving them food for thought.
A new consensus is occurring, and if the present elites don't change, then they will go, as did the establishment parties in Scotland at the last GE. That the SNP are now considering themselves as established should also start to be considered by themselves.
It has been happening for many years.
https://twitter.com/littlelostlad/status/643444279537442816
https://twitter.com/oconnola/status/643444649227649024
I think for this parliamentary term, we should look to do all the things we want to do but would often be scared to. We can get rid of the licence fee, scrap the Human Rights Act and opt out of the ECHR, make tax allowances (and lower rates) transferable for married couples, charge market rents for the non-poor in council housing and plenty more. Once the reforms are made, we can go back to a no-scaring-of-horses approach after 2020. Labour will then have to return to the new consensus that we have set through three election victories.
The naivety of the Left is astonishing. They think that by banning religion, culture and nations they will unleash some hitherto repressed enlightenment that innately lies within all human beings and we will all move to a higher, purer form of existence.
In reality, doing so requires repression of our most human social bonds and unleashes a truly dark side of control in order to overcome it, which is devoid of any comfort or empathy, where people are desperately unhappy, bored, unfulfilled, and not free to express themselves.
I think the Conservatives need to just show that they are competent governors in the true small-c conservative mode: implement slow, thoughtful and gradual change to improve the country.
Well-considered gradual change would contrast even more with Corbyn's big-shift policies.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-34118482
They'll be outlawing pornographic holodeck simulations next.
Edited extra bit: "She believes that they reinforce traditional stereotypes of women and the view that a relationship need be nothing more than physical."
Ahem. Worth reminding people which gender currently spends more (by miles) on sex toys.
This bizarre view that men have a depraved sex drive and women are pure and virtuous is... well, demented.
I'm rather more worried about autonomous killing machines, to be honest.
This would mean that:
*) parties other than Labour would have to try to attract and interact with unions and their members instead of the antagonism that currently exists.
*) Labour would not be seen as being in-hock to the unions, and it would help remove the evil influence of Unite within the party.
*) people who are put off being in a union because of their links to Labour would feel able to (re)join.
*) It would remove a barrier to a general reform of party financing.
It's a win-win for everyone, including Labour. Sadly this will not happen for the obvious reasons.
These caricatures of "the left" are no more accurate than "baby-eating tories".
He and they need to be called out on their lies.
In the case of individuals like Matthew Taylor, Jeremy Corbyn, Gerald Kaufman, Andrew Neather, Emily Thornberry, most of our acting establishment and several of our leading left-wing PB posters, it is wholly accurate.
(2) will not deliver (3) but if that'd where he wants to focus his energies..
https://twitter.com/FraserNelson/status/643711169992110080
The deficit was massive. Whilst it still is, Labour, and others, have complained at its rate of reduction. The only way for debt to fall would be for Osborne to run a small net surplus over the Coalition years [NB not reduce the deficit to zero, as there are interest payments which must be considered].
https://twitter.com/ARHoggard/status/643501688431747072
It could not because Labour’s leadership of former special advisers does not look like the people it wants to represent and does not look as if it likes the look of them either. In this, it is typical of the wider educated left in England, which almost alone in the world, makes a virtue of denigrating its own people.
The universities, left press, and the arts characterise the English middle-class as Mail-reading misers, who are sexist, racist and homophobic to boot. Meanwhile, they characterise the white working class as lardy Sun-reading slobs, who are, since you asked, also sexist, racist and homophobic. The national history is reduced to one long imperial crime, and the notion that the English are not such a bad bunch with many strong radical traditions worth preserving is rejected as risibly complacent. So tainted and untrustworthy are they that they must be told what they can say and how they should behave.
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/may/09/labour-left-miliband-hating-english
The married couples tax system should definitely be focused on. It makes no sense that a married couple each on £40k pay the same level of tax as a married couple with one person on £60k and one on £20k.
Also, the council housing system is the last great unreformed part of the welfare system.
It's astonishing.
Well worth a look.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/history/battle-of-britain/11865303/The-Battle-of-Britain-as-it-happened-on-September-15-1940-live.html
As a student and in my twenties, I thought it out of date and irrelevant (this was in the 1960s). My father fought in Burma, was injured and never ever discussed the war - it was quite traumatic. My mother remembered the bombing (she lived in London) and rationing - and would discuss that. (she was a butcher's daughter and went to school in wellies - she had no shoes.
As I grew older and either wiser or dumber, I realised the levels of sacrifice and austerity (real austerity not the modern version which is risible) that people endured bot during 6 years of war and at least 6 years after the war ended.
So I suspect it unlikely many of those over 55 are likely to let it be forgotten...
He can make some very good observations and does nice graphs - but his politics on finances is waaaaayy off what most would consider acceptable.
North - 17 (Chester, Wirral W, Halifax, Barrow, Dewsbury, Lancaster, Mboro S, Wakefield, Copeland, Hartlepool, Darlington, Bpool S, Burnley, Scunthorpe, Chorley, B Auckland, Hyndburn)
Midlands - 10 (Newcastle-U-L, Wolves SW, NE Derbys, Walsall N, Bham Northfield, Gedling, Stoke S, Bham Edgbaston, Cov S, Cov NW
London - 10 (Ealing, Brentford, Ilford, Hampstead, Enfield, Harrow W, Westminster N, Tooting, Eltham, Bermondsey
Wales - 7 (Ynys Mon, Bridgend, Wrexham, Clwyd S, Delyn, Alyn, Newport W
South - 5 (Cambridge, Hove, Bristol E, Soton Test, Bristol W
Scotland - 1(Edinburgh S)
Polly - Those who flounce out on Jeremy Corbyn will not escape blame if Labour crashes.
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/sep/15/jeremy-corbyn-labour-mps
Interesting article which reveals more about Labour’s predicament IMO than dear old Polly realises. Something must be amiss, rarely have I seen her attempt to polish the same old turd with so little enthusiasm or conviction.
It wasn't old-fogies in hats anymore talking about people I'd never known - it was immediate and personal. I imagine that the perceived increase in media attention that it gets is down to much better communications from the RBL, and GW1/2 plus Afghanistan deployments.
And this is my complaint about Labour under Miliband -- they should have been publishing graphs like this, not keeping schtum while Osborne lectured voters on household economics.
Compare the slopes before and after the first black line.
Anyway, I'm not sure any attack on this line works as half of it just reminds people who put us in this position in the first place. In fact, this is why Labour avoided this line, they knew it was suicidal.
Let the activists and know-nothings play around with figures they don't understand.
@ZoraSuleman: The TUC Congress has voted to hold a co-ordinated day of national action against the Trade Union Bill.
It's the public sector ones and Tube drivers with hostage customers that are the target here.
How would they take into account those who did not vote in 2015 and 2010 or ever but now says they will vote Labour ? Their systems will far more easily capture the opposite drift.
Remarkable.
'Cameron won’t take refugees who have reached Europe – like there’s a humanitarian offside rule
David Cameron visited a refugee camp in Lebanon on Monday. Our prime minister, a man who can normally muster all the moral authority of Roman Polanski’s penis, has discovered his soul. Amazing what a three-week break away from parliament can do. It only took David Cameron six years to finally come out and take a moral stand, and all it took was the death of one toddler. You may call the Tories’ glacial crawl towards respecting human life a political and personal train crash. I call it compassion.'
http://tinyurl.com/ne8v4na
50 seats with majorities of under 4,400. This could get really bad for Labour.
... by the Lebanese.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3234458/Two-100-Syrian-migrants-ISIS-fighters-PM-warned-Lebanese-minister-tells-Cameron-extremist-group-sending-jihadists-cover-attack-West.html
If people are prepared to go on mainstream news and voice opinions that until recently were unspeakable shows how opinion is changing. Corbyn's first act as Leader was to go on a refugee march, he's swimming against the tide.
1. More spending [ this is where Osborne cut savagely ]
2. Growth and hence tax receipts, Here, he did horribly badly. Only since 2014, did it begin to pick up slightly.
Keeping a tight rein on spending does not necessarily ensure reduction of the deficit if tax receipts do not increase.
And my mother and aunt kept alive the memory of their elder brother who died in Flanders in 1918.
I won’t forget.
More like swimming against a tsunami, if polls are correct.
What is labour's immigration policy? The world is waiting.
Makes you wonder why we, as one of the EU's biggest paymasters, have never threatened to do the same.
If this is where union thinking is going, Out should be favourite by some way.
I must have been amongst the last to view it because when I went to put it on my tablet to show my wife it was gone. Who is Adrian Cousins?
The video is (was?) very hard hitting and I can understand why JC would want to pull it but "copyright"?
In response, Cameron is likely to have a fairly easy task brushing aside the questions, so it's unlikely to be a very illuminating exchange.
Tomorrow obviously will be a session of high drama, but my guess is that, once things have settled down and we've all got used to the bizarre spectacle of a Labour front-bench largely comprised of the long-term malcontents and marginalised of the parliamentary Labour party, it will all become rather dull: predictable questions and predictable, formulaic responses.
This made me LOL, it has the reek of What Have We Done about it “I’m honestly shocked at how bad the operation has been for the past 48 hours. I honestly thought [Mr Corbyn] would be better than this.”
http://order-order.com/2015/09/15/bbc-smear-of-deaf-tory-mp-goes-viral/#:TBuXUuhh4XYd5A
Good to see ITV helping:
twitter.com/PaulBrandITV/status/643727486640128000
"Yes, it needs managing"
"Racist"