politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » It’s time for Labour to push back against Tory plastic patriotism
Labour has allowed the Conservative party to question its patriotism and take sole ownership of the Union Jack. That is a mistake, says Joff Wild – particularly in light of what has happened over recent years
Southam, I voted for Brexit and I consider that I was acting with my country's best interests in mind.
As to your last point, as a patriot, I believe that MPs who are returned from Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland are entitled to participate in the government of this country.
There is no hope for her if she is. I doubt she is still seeking advice from them, probably some MP behind the scenes trying to get leadership change talk going again.
I'm not sure that making a list of things Joff (or Labour) don't like and calling them 'unpatriotic' will get much traction. It's as empty as saying 'living above our means isn't patriotic'.
Voters are not that stupid. They can tell the difference between policies they might not like and positions which are not patriotic - most notably, supporting or sympathising with our enemies, or failing to support our servicemen and women. Things like this for example:
I find it difficult to criticise people holding elections. I had enough Cons berating Dave for holding the referendum because the little people didn't understand it and likewise, I have a problem with criticism of the calling of the GE just now. Of course that comes with the understanding that it was blatantly, shamelessly opportunistic also.
As for patriotism, it's a bad point to make with the current leadership. Jeremy is no D-Day war hero a la Denis Healey. Despite the mud slung, the fact remains that they have thought and perhaps still think that the British State is an imperialist oppressor.
As to your last point, as a patriot, I believe that MPs who are returned from Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland are entitled to participate in the government of this country.
This is a good point. If both Sinn Fein and the DUP are regarded as beyond the pale, where does that leave Northern Irish voters?
I do think 'citizen of the world' is a bit of a weird idea, but the 'citizen of nowhere' line probably alienated some people without actually getting any benefit with others. I don't think it was clever, but I'm curious why it irritates you so much.
As to your last point, as a patriot, I believe that MPs who are returned from Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland are entitled to participate in the government of this country.
This is a good point. If both Sinn Fein and the DUP are regarded as beyond the pale, where does that leave Northern Irish voters?
I thought this, and said so. I am used to being called all the names under the sun/banned/ignored for being a UKIP supporter, but now it seems the vast majority of Northern Irish people are equally nasty
As to your last point, as a patriot, I believe that MPs who are returned from Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland are entitled to participate in the government of this country.
This is a good point. If both Sinn Fein and the DUP are regarded as beyond the pale, where does that leave Northern Irish voters?
Not quite sure beyond the pale is a helpful term in N Irish politics.
I think identifying yourself with the national interest is different from naked calls to patriotism. Brexit is more the first of these, where what's in the interest of the Conservative Party, leaving the EU and perceptions of what is in the national interest have become horribly conflated.
As to your last point, as a patriot, I believe that MPs who are returned from Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland are entitled to participate in the government of this country.
This is a good point. If both Sinn Fein and the DUP are regarded as beyond the pale, where does that leave Northern Irish voters?
Not quite sure beyond the pale is a helpful term in N Irish politics.
I do think 'citizen of the world' is a bit of a weird idea, but the 'citizen of nowhere' line probably alienated some people without actually getting any benefit with others. I don't think it was clever, but I'm curious why it irritates you so much.
It made me think of this
Rootless cosmopolitan was a pejorative label used during the anti-Semitic campaign in the Soviet Union after World War II.[1]
Cosmopolitans were intellectuals who were accused of expressing pro-Western feelings and lack of patriotism. The term "rootless cosmopolitan" referred to Jewish intellectuals. It was popularized during the campaign in a Pravda article condemning a group of theatrical critics
I'm not sure that making a list of things Joff (or Labour) don't like and calling them 'unpatriotic' will get much traction. It's as empty as saying 'living above our means isn't patriotic'.
Voters are not that stupid. They can tell the difference between policies they might not like and positions which are not patriotic - most notably, supporting or sympathising with our enemies, or failing to support our servicemen and women. Things like this for example:
So, for as long as the present leadership are in place, it's best for Labour to change the subject.
...yet in a sickening and disturbing display of brass necked hypocrisy, the PLP gave this man a standing ovation in the HoC. Well, Corbyn has won in his own party, and Labour are no longer a respectable party of the moderate, centre left, patriotism or not.
The moderates will deeply regret what they have legitimised.
The citizens of nowhere line still really pisses me off.
I do think people who call themselves "citizens of the world" are a bit twattish to be honest.
Just slightly!
Usually found on twitter or on a gap year
Not so. It might not have penetrated some families, but many families stretch over different countries and national loyalties. Since family usually comes first, it's just not that simple anymore.
The citizens of nowhere line still really pisses me off.
I do think people who call themselves "citizens of the world" are a bit twattish to be honest.
But not NEARLY as twattish as saying in a keynote party conference speech that they are citizens of nowhere as if insulting people is a grown up thing to do. And that was our prime minister.
From the article " Jeremy Corbyn, who does not sing the national anthem and has spent 40 years consorting with apologists for terrorism and those who wish the UK harm........Corbyn is undoubtedly vulnerable (whatever he says now, the central charges are true) "
If you concede that point (which imho is a massive concession), then I don't know that any of the bullet points outlining the Tories faults as you see them make much of a difference.
Also on the flag I don't think Labour draping themselves in it would go down well with a lot of their supporters. Labour politicians in tanks waving Union flags would backfire badly in places like Liverpool and the university towns I would think. Would be very strange. And having Corbyn do it would be bizarre and look craven.
However, there's a new strain of thought emerging, whereby the wealthy in various parts of the world are identifying more by their lifestyle and wealth than location, due to ease of travel and the internet.
Loss of national identity fuelled by this at the top end and mass migration at the bottom end is a serious issue. I'm not saying May's approach was sensible, but this is something that concerns a lot of people.
The young/old dividing line is another serious fracture in politics.
The citizens of nowhere line still really pisses me off.
I do think people who call themselves "citizens of the world" are a bit twattish to be honest.
Just slightly!
Usually found on twitter or on a gap year
Not so. It might not have penetrated some families, but many families stretch over different countries and national loyalties. Since family usually comes first, it's just not that simple anymore.
I suspect many of these would not vote Tory. Your classic Ugandan Indian immigrants who quickly integrated would wonder what the fuss was, who on earth would move here and not want to be British? It will have put some largely metropolitan remain voters noses out of joint I agree though.
I do think 'citizen of the world' is a bit of a weird idea, but the 'citizen of nowhere' line probably alienated some people without actually getting any benefit with others. I don't think it was clever, but I'm curious why it irritates you so much.
It made me think of this
Rootless cosmopolitan was a pejorative label used during the anti-Semitic campaign in the Soviet Union after World War II.[1]
Cosmopolitans were intellectuals who were accused of expressing pro-Western feelings and lack of patriotism. The term "rootless cosmopolitan" referred to Jewish intellectuals. It was popularized during the campaign in a Pravda article condemning a group of theatrical critics
Fair enough. I definitely think it was silly of her to make the comment she did.
Perhaps it's just envy, but there is a perception that there is a set of individuals - and businesses - who don't have a stake in the country. I say this as someone on the right, but I don't like it when it hear the argument that a group of people of businesses will leave the country if country does something that they don't like.
Perhaps it's true, perhaps Brexit will damage the City and we'll all regret that. But I keep thinking, we really shouldn't be relying upon such people and businesses that can take flight at the first sign of trouble.
I say this as a Thatcherite who wants people to be able to take care of themselves. But we should always remember that we will always have to some form of nation state to set the parameters within which we work.
However, there's a new strain of thought emerging, whereby the wealthy in various parts of the world are identifying more by their lifestyle and wealth than location, due to ease of travel and the internet.
Loss of national identity fuelled by this at the top end and mass migration at the bottom end is a serious issue. I'm not saying May's approach was sensible, but this is something that concerns a lot of people.
The young/old dividing line is another serious fracture in politics.
We certainly live in turbulent times.
Is this 'new strain of thought' actually part of the way 'the wealthy' think, or a manifestation of the jealousy and jingoism of 'the poor' and 'the angry'?
On God I'd only just come down from John Major. So, what can Labour do? How about, not have an unpleasant shower of anti British, anti UK, automatically pro every enemy we've ever had or will have, ****s, running it.
I do think 'citizen of the world' is a bit of a weird idea, but the 'citizen of nowhere' line probably alienated some people without actually getting any benefit with others. I don't think it was clever, but I'm curious why it irritates you so much.
It made me think of this
Rootless cosmopolitan was a pejorative label used during the anti-Semitic campaign in the Soviet Union after World War II.[1]
Cosmopolitans were intellectuals who were accused of expressing pro-Western feelings and lack of patriotism. The term "rootless cosmopolitan" referred to Jewish intellectuals. It was popularized during the campaign in a Pravda article condemning a group of theatrical critics
Fair enough. I definitely think it was silly of her to make the comment she did.
Perhaps it's just envy, but there is a perception that there is a set of individuals - and businesses - who don't have a stake in the country. I say this as someone on the right, but I don't like it when it hear the argument that a group of people of businesses will leave the country if country does something that they don't like.
Perhaps it's true, perhaps Brexit will damage the City and we'll all regret that. But I keep thinking, we really shouldn't be relying upon such people and businesses that can take flight at the first sign of trouble.
I say this as a Thatcherite who wants people to be able to take care of themselves. But we should always remember that we will always have to some form of nation state to set the parameters within which we work.
It's not the first sign of trouble, it's the wilful destruction of what they were invited here/started their businesses here.
I know someone who has a letter from Margaret Thatcher's government telling him London is the place to invest as it is the gateway to the European Single Market.
Mr. Anorak, bit of a complicated subject to discuss (and I'm meant to be working and have to leave imminently). I think Mr. Royale's comment is a good contribution. If I have time later I'll try and reply more fully. [My simplest thought on the matter is that it was stupid for May to express herself the way she did because it gave her no benefit and annoyed some people].
On topic, the patriotism of Labour figures like Clement Attlee, Hugh Gaitskell, Roy Hattersley and, yes, Joff Wild were and are absolutely beyond question.
In fact, I'd argue some Labour MPs in the late 1930s and early 1940s were more actively patriotic than even some Conservatives.
But, this sadly isn't the case with such figures as Corbyn and McDonnell.
On topic, the patriotism of Labour figures like Clement Attlee, Hugh Gaitskell, Roy Hattersley and, yes, Joff Wild were and are absolutely beyond question.
Serious question: Do you think the patriotism of Conservative figures like Ted Heath, Ken Clarke or Michael Heseltine is questionable?
Mr. Anorak, bit of a complicated subject to discuss (and I'm meant to be working and have to leave imminently). I think Mr. Royale's comment is a good contribution. If I have time later I'll try and reply more fully. [My simplest thought on the matter is that it was stupid for May to express herself the way she did because it gave her no benefit and annoyed some people].
Your simplest thought is pretty accurate, and sums up a great deal of the Tory's election campaign (if you replace "some" with "a lot", obviously).
I do think 'citizen of the world' is a bit of a weird idea, but the 'citizen of nowhere' line probably alienated some people without actually getting any benefit with others. I don't think it was clever, but I'm curious why it irritates you so much.
It made me think of this
Rootless cosmopolitan was a pejorative label used during the anti-Semitic campaign in the Soviet Union after World War II.[1]
Cosmopolitans were intellectuals who were accused of expressing pro-Western feelings and lack of patriotism. The term "rootless cosmopolitan" referred to Jewish intellectuals. It was popularized during the campaign in a Pravda article condemning a group of theatrical critics
Fair enough. I definitely think it was silly of her to make the comment she did.
Perhaps it's just envy, but there is a perception that there is a set of individuals - and businesses - who don't have a stake in the country. I say this as someone on the right, but I don't like it when it hear the argument that a group of people of businesses will leave the country if country does something that they don't like.
Perhaps it's true, perhaps Brexit will damage the City and we'll all regret that. But I keep thinking, we really shouldn't be relying upon such people and businesses that can take flight at the first sign of trouble.
I say this as a Thatcherite who wants people to be able to take care of themselves. But we should always remember that we will always have to some form of nation state to set the parameters within which we work.
It's not the first sign of trouble, it's the wilful destruction of what they were invited here/started their businesses here.
I know someone who has a letter from Margaret Thatcher's government telling him London is the place to invest as it is the gateway to the European Single Market.
I don't think the Single Market is the problem its the EU's tendency towards an unelected Single Government that is the issue...
I do think 'citizen of the world' is a bit of a weird idea, but the 'citizen of nowhere' line probably alienated some people without actually getting any benefit with others. I don't think it was clever, but I'm curious why it irritates you so much.
It made me think of this
Rootless cosmopolitan was a pejorative label used during the anti-Semitic campaign in the Soviet Union after World War II.[1]
Cosmopolitans were intellectuals who were accused of expressing pro-Western feelings and lack of patriotism. The term "rootless cosmopolitan" referred to Jewish intellectuals. It was popularized during the campaign in a Pravda article condemning a group of theatrical critics
Fair enough. I definitely think it was silly of her to make the comment she did.
Perhaps it's just envy, but there is a perception that there is a set of individuals - and businesses - who don't have a stake in the country. I say this as someone on the right, but I don't like it when it hear the argument that a group of people of businesses will leave the country if country does something that they don't like.
Perhaps it's true, perhaps Brexit will damage the City and we'll all regret that. But I keep thinking, we really shouldn't be relying upon such people and businesses that can take flight at the first sign of trouble.
I say this as a Thatcherite who wants people to be able to take care of themselves. But we should always remember that we will always have to some form of nation state to set the parameters within which we work.
Funnily enough if you google 'citizens of nowhere', one of the first things that appears is this essay by Rahul Rao, that makes exactly the same point as TSE, including the 'rootless cosmopolitan' phrase
On topic, the patriotism of Labour figures like Clement Attlee, Hugh Gaitskell, Roy Hattersley and, yes, Joff Wild were and are absolutely beyond question.
Serious question: Do you think the patriotism of Conservative figures like Ted Heath, Ken Clarke or Michael Heseltine is questionable?
I don't know. But they certainly see it very differently to how I do.
I do think 'citizen of the world' is a bit of a weird idea, but the 'citizen of nowhere' line probably alienated some people without actually getting any benefit with others. I don't think it was clever, but I'm curious why it irritates you so much.
It made me think of this
Rootless cosmopolitan was a pejorative label used during the anti-Semitic campaign in the Soviet Union after World War II.[1]
Cosmopolitans were intellectuals who were accused of expressing pro-Western feelings and lack of patriotism. The term "rootless cosmopolitan" referred to Jewish intellectuals. It was popularized during the campaign in a Pravda article condemning a group of theatrical critics
Fair enough. I definitely think it was silly of her to make the comment she did.
Perhaps it's just envy, but there is a perception that there is a set of individuals - and businesses - who don't have a stake in the country. I say this as someone on the right, but I don't like it when it hear the argument that a group of people of businesses will leave the country if country does something that they don't like.
Perhaps it's true, perhaps Brexit will damage the City and we'll all regret that. But I keep thinking, we really shouldn't be relying upon such people and businesses that can take flight at the first sign of trouble.
I say this as a Thatcherite who wants people to be able to take care of themselves. But we should always remember that we will always have to some form of nation state to set the parameters within which we work.
It's not the first sign of trouble, it's the wilful destruction of what they were invited here/started their businesses here.
I know someone who has a letter from Margaret Thatcher's government telling him London is the place to invest as it is the gateway to the European Single Market.
Not wanting repeat what's been done to death on here, but a lot of the trouble can be traced back to May 2004 when the EU expanded. I can remember going to Jersey (admittedly not in the EU, but it's still relevant) for our summer holidays in 1990 and 1991 and all of the staff at the hotel we'd stay in were from Portugal. Migrant labour has always been a part of life, but what was started in 2004 was on a totally different scale.
Personally, I think if we wanted expansion to work we needed to encourage the formation of a United States of Europe with the federal transfer of (a lot of) money from the rich to the poor with a view to levelling the living standards from Chelsea to Craiova. Alternatively, we should have vetoed the expansion.
What we've had for 13 years is neither one thing nor the other.
I used to live in a Hampshire village. Some friends who moved there in the 60s said they often met people then who had never been out of the village in their lives. My friends said when they first moved there they found several shopkeepers refused to serve them as they weren't "local".
On topic, the patriotism of Labour figures like Clement Attlee, Hugh Gaitskell, Roy Hattersley and, yes, Joff Wild were and are absolutely beyond question.
Serious question: Do you think the patriotism of Conservative figures like Ted Heath, Ken Clarke or Michael Heseltine is questionable?
I don't know. But they certainly see it very differently to how I do.
It rather depends on whether you think it can be patriotic to wish to see one's own country become a component part of another. I think it can be (Duke of Hamilton in Scotland of 1707 etc), but it is not patriotic to dissemble about that being the end point of integration, as so many British Europhiles (but certainly not all) have.
On topic, the patriotism of Labour figures like Clement Attlee, Hugh Gaitskell, Roy Hattersley and, yes, Joff Wild were and are absolutely beyond question.
Serious question: Do you think the patriotism of Conservative figures like Ted Heath, Ken Clarke or Michael Heseltine is questionable?
Wasn't Ted Heath at the D-Day landings and mentioned in despatches ? Not that that makes him a good PM, but...
On topic, the patriotism of Labour figures like Clement Attlee, Hugh Gaitskell, Roy Hattersley and, yes, Joff Wild were and are absolutely beyond question.
Serious question: Do you think the patriotism of Conservative figures like Ted Heath, Ken Clarke or Michael Heseltine is questionable?
Yes. And I would add you to the list as well.
You have freely admitted you wish to see the end of the UK with it being subsumed into a federal state.
Ken Clarke in his infamous interview said he looked forward to a day when Parliament was nothing more than a council chamber in Europe. Now whilst it is a perfectly right and proper to hold such views and to campaign for them, they are incompatible with the concept of patriotism and with the belief in national self determination and national sovereignty.
The big BUT of course is that there is nothing in principle wrong with that. You and I share different views of the value of the nation state and of its place in the maintenance of democratic freedoms. Whilst I think you are wrong that does not mean I think you are evil or even mildly naughty. Just that when it comes to the specific concept of patriotism one cannot be a patriot and still believe in the end of the nation state.
Please realise I am in no way critical of you for this. You are continually open about your pro federalist views and that is just as justified a world view as that of Westphalian Sovereignty. It is just not a view I share.
Much is being (rightly) made of TM's appalling strategy and presentation as major contributors to the GE mess but (and I think it should have been foreseen) Corbyn's performance was an at least equal factor in determining the outcome. Labour was hugely successful at identifying their best liars, and at putting only them in front of the electorate, and Corbyn was definitely the best of the bunch. The unconvincing were swiftly put into purdah; even Diane Abbott was hooked just in time but not before she'd done Labour's costings.
On topic, the patriotism of Labour figures like Clement Attlee, Hugh Gaitskell, Roy Hattersley and, yes, Joff Wild were and are absolutely beyond question.
Serious question: Do you think the patriotism of Conservative figures like Ted Heath, Ken Clarke or Michael Heseltine is questionable?
Wasn't Ted Heath at the D-Day landings and mentioned in despatches ? Not that that makes him a good PM, but...
Denis Healey was at Anzio I think too.
Well quite. Men who risked their lives in battle are deemed less patriotic than blue-passport obsessives.
On topic, the patriotism of Labour figures like Clement Attlee, Hugh Gaitskell, Roy Hattersley and, yes, Joff Wild were and are absolutely beyond question.
Serious question: Do you think the patriotism of Conservative figures like Ted Heath, Ken Clarke or Michael Heseltine is questionable?
Wasn't Ted Heath at the D-Day landings and mentioned in despatches ? Not that that makes him a good PM, but...
Denis Healey was at Anzio I think too.
Well quite. Men who risked their lives in battle are deemed less patriotic than blue-passport obsessives.
For a more extreme example Petain was a WW1 hero to the French. I am not sure they considered him a patriot by the middle of WW2.
On topic, the patriotism of Labour figures like Clement Attlee, Hugh Gaitskell, Roy Hattersley and, yes, Joff Wild were and are absolutely beyond question.
Serious question: Do you think the patriotism of Conservative figures like Ted Heath, Ken Clarke or Michael Heseltine is questionable?
Wasn't Ted Heath at the D-Day landings and mentioned in despatches ? Not that that makes him a good PM, but...
Denis Healey was at Anzio I think too.
yup, 'beach master' so pretty much in charge of the british landing force.
On topic, the patriotism of Labour figures like Clement Attlee, Hugh Gaitskell, Roy Hattersley and, yes, Joff Wild were and are absolutely beyond question.
Serious question: Do you think the patriotism of Conservative figures like Ted Heath, Ken Clarke or Michael Heseltine is questionable?
Yes. And I would add you to the list as well.
You have freely admitted you wish to see the end of the with it being subsumed into a federal state.
Ken Clarke in his infamous interview said he looked forward to a day when Parliament was nothing more than a council chamber in Europe. Now whilst it is a perfectly right and proper to hold such views and to campaign for them, they are incompatible with the concept of patriotism and with the belief in national self determination and national sovereignty.
The big BUT of course is that there is nothing in principle wrong with that. You and I share different views of the value of the nation state and of its place in the maintenance of democratic freedoms. Whilst I think you are wrong that does not mean I think you are evil or even mildly naughty. Just that when it comes to the specific concept of patriotism one cannot be a patriot and still believe in the end of the nation state.
Please realise I am in no way critical of you for this. You are continually open about your pro federalist views and that is just as justified a world view as that of Westphalian Sovereignty. It is just not a view I share.
Um. I think you said this morning that you campaigned to effectively " see the end of the UK ".
On topic, the patriotism of Labour figures like Clement Attlee, Hugh Gaitskell, Roy Hattersley and, yes, Joff Wild were and are absolutely beyond question.
Serious question: Do you think the patriotism of Conservative figures like Ted Heath, Ken Clarke or Michael Heseltine is questionable?
Yes. And I would add you to the list as well.
You have freely admitted you wish to see the end of the UK with it being subsumed into a federal state.
Ken Clarke in his infamous interview said he looked forward to a day when Parliament was nothing more than a council chamber in Europe. Now whilst it is a perfectly right and proper to hold such views and to campaign for them, they are incompatible with the concept of patriotism and with the belief in national self determination and national sovereignty.
The big BUT of course is that there is nothing in principle wrong with that. You and I share different views of the value of the nation state and of its place in the maintenance of democratic freedoms. Whilst I think you are wrong that does not mean I think you are evil or even mildly naughty. Just that when it comes to the specific concept of patriotism one cannot be a patriot and still believe in the end of the nation state.
Please realise I am in no way critical of you for this. You are continually open about your pro federalist views and that is just as justified a world view as that of Westphalian Sovereignty. It is just not a view I share.
Have you got a link to Clarke's quotation about the 'council chamber'? Not saying you're wrong, but Ken himself always insisted Norman Lamont made it up.
A fine header and photo. Reminds me of The Discreet Charm of the Bourgeoisie. One of those titles that tells the story. What an unpleasant old charlatan Boris Johnson is.
On topic, the patriotism of Labour figures like Clement Attlee, Hugh Gaitskell, Roy Hattersley and, yes, Joff Wild were and are absolutely beyond question.
Serious question: Do you think the patriotism of Conservative figures like Ted Heath, Ken Clarke or Michael Heseltine is questionable?
Yes. And I would add you to the list as well.
You have freely admitted you wish to see the end of the with it being subsumed into a federal state.
Ken Clarke in his infamous interview said he looked forward to a day when Parliament was nothing more than a council chamber in Europe. Now whilst it is a perfectly right and proper to hold such views and to campaign for them, they are incompatible with the concept of patriotism and with the belief in national self determination and national sovereignty.
The big BUT of course is that there is nothing in principle wrong with that. You and I share different views of the value of the nation state and of its place in the maintenance of democratic freedoms. Whilst I think you are wrong that does not mean I think you are evil or even mildly naughty. Just that when it comes to the specific concept of patriotism one cannot be a patriot and still believe in the end of the nation state.
Please realise I am in no way critical of you for this. You are continually open about your pro federalist views and that is just as justified a world view as that of Westphalian Sovereignty. It is just not a view I share.
Um. I think you said this morning that you campaigned to effectively " see the end of the UK ".
Quite right. But then I would never consider myself a patriot either. In case you missed it I was going out of my way not to criticise William. This is in my view an intellectual debate not a slanging match. My loyalty lies first and foremost to what I consider to be my country which is England. But even there it is only because I think it is the best reflection of democratic freedom, the best structure within which to allow as much freedom as possible. It is the same reason that as an Englishman I support Scots Independence as I believe it allows more democratic accountability than the current situation.
As I have said many times before what I don't understand are those who preach UK Independence from the EU but don't want to allow Scots Independence from the UK.
The citizens of nowhere line still really pisses me off.
Yes. That one did a lot of damage.
It was line to push buttons of the Metropolitan Liberal Elite, no wonder the Tories lost Kensington on her watch.
Chingford & Woodford Green the next domino to topple for Labour in London. Meanwhile Penistone and Stocksbridge will drift Tory all else being equal.
All else isn't equal right now though, and if there was an election tommorow I'd expect Labour to win both easily.
That would be a symbolically bitter blow for many Tories. Nothing to do with IDS, of course, but because it was Norman's old stopping ground.
Not to forget Churchill!
I can see Momentum making a big push to oust IDS in the next election. He's a hate figure amongst them.
Chingford & Woodford Green
Conservative hold
LAB Bilal Mahmood 20638
CON Iain Duncan Smith 23076
LD Deborah Unger 2043
GRN Sinead King 1204
IDS had a 9000 lead cut by 2/3rds
Although his share of the vote was up slightly to 49%.
Labour will squeeze the living crap out of the Green and Liberal vote next time and take the seat. The Tories will probably never get it back because of demographic change. It's a nice middle class seat that is still – just – affordable (in London terms) right on the edge of Epping Forest, which is a beautiful place. Very attractive to metropolitans with young families.
If Brexit is abandoned (via a second referendum) or we end up with a a really "soft" Brexit it would insuilate us against the potential excesses of Corbyn and McDonnell. They legally couldn't go too far.
Given Corbyn's record of support for Sinn Fein, opposition to the monarchy, lack of support for the army etc he will find it difficult to play the patriotism card. While his support for Brexit, including leaving the single market, hardly enables him to effectively counter a hard Brexit, indeed moderate Tories already seem to be moving more in that direction than he is. Finally the fact May is now said to be preparing to ease off on austerity, a position also backed by the DUP, gives him little headway on that front either
I also think the Corbyn attacks wont work. The public heard the attack lines, saw that they bore no relation to the charming man who was campaigning, and made up their own mind.
May underestimated Corbyn. PB Tories are doing the same now
Comments
Well
As to your last point, as a patriot, I believe that MPs who are returned from Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland are entitled to participate in the government of this country.
Voters are not that stupid. They can tell the difference between policies they might not like and positions which are not patriotic - most notably, supporting or sympathising with our enemies, or failing to support our servicemen and women. Things like this for example:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/05/12/britain-has-not-fought-just-war-since-1945-says-jeremy-corbyn/
http://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/811474/Jeremy-Corbyn-prime-minister-Falkland-Islands-grab-Argentina-General-Election
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/05/21/growing-row-jeremy-corbyns-links-ira-refuses-five-times-condemn/
So, for as long as the present leadership are in place, it's best for Labour to change the subject.
As for patriotism, it's a bad point to make with the current leadership. Jeremy is no D-Day war hero a la Denis Healey. Despite the mud slung, the fact remains that they have thought and perhaps still think that the British State is an imperialist oppressor.
I do think 'citizen of the world' is a bit of a weird idea, but the 'citizen of nowhere' line probably alienated some people without actually getting any benefit with others. I don't think it was clever, but I'm curious why it irritates you so much.
All it made me think of is 'rootless cosmopolitan'
(I know that was not her intention, but that's where my mind went)
Totally unnecessary.
Rootless cosmopolitan was a pejorative label used during the anti-Semitic campaign in the Soviet Union after World War II.[1]
Cosmopolitans were intellectuals who were accused of expressing pro-Western feelings and lack of patriotism. The term "rootless cosmopolitan" referred to Jewish intellectuals. It was popularized during the campaign in a Pravda article condemning a group of theatrical critics
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rootless_cosmopolitan
On reflection, it's a bit strong for a Prime Minister to say - even a Tory one.
The moderates will deeply regret what they have legitimised.
From the article
" Jeremy Corbyn, who does not sing the national anthem and has spent 40 years consorting with apologists for terrorism and those who wish the UK harm........Corbyn is undoubtedly vulnerable (whatever he says now, the central charges are true) "
If you concede that point (which imho is a massive concession), then I don't know that any of the bullet points outlining the Tories faults as you see them make much of a difference.
Also on the flag I don't think Labour draping themselves in it would go down well with a lot of their supporters. Labour politicians in tanks waving Union flags would backfire badly in places like Liverpool and the university towns I would think. Would be very strange. And having Corbyn do it would be bizarre and look craven.
However, there's a new strain of thought emerging, whereby the wealthy in various parts of the world are identifying more by their lifestyle and wealth than location, due to ease of travel and the internet.
Loss of national identity fuelled by this at the top end and mass migration at the bottom end is a serious issue. I'm not saying May's approach was sensible, but this is something that concerns a lot of people.
The young/old dividing line is another serious fracture in politics.
We certainly live in turbulent times.
All else isn't equal right now though, and if there was an election tommorow I'd expect Labour to win both easily.
Perhaps it's just envy, but there is a perception that there is a set of individuals - and businesses - who don't have a stake in the country. I say this as someone on the right, but I don't like it when it hear the argument that a group of people of businesses will leave the country if country does something that they don't like.
Perhaps it's true, perhaps Brexit will damage the City and we'll all regret that. But I keep thinking, we really shouldn't be relying upon such people and businesses that can take flight at the first sign of trouble.
I say this as a Thatcherite who wants people to be able to take care of themselves. But we should always remember that we will always have to some form of nation state to set the parameters within which we work.
Rural, in the north. Precisely the sort of seat I expected the Tories to be winning (Bassetlaw for instance)
Utterly shocking performance from the blues there.
Cantrerbury, Leamington & Kensington all more explainable.
I know someone who has a letter from Margaret Thatcher's government telling him London is the place to invest as it is the gateway to the European Single Market.
"But if you believe you’re a citizen of the world, you’re a citizen of nowhere. You don’t understand what the very word ‘citizenship’ means."
In fact, I'd argue some Labour MPs in the late 1930s and early 1940s were more actively patriotic than even some Conservatives.
But, this sadly isn't the case with such figures as Corbyn and McDonnell.
Remember Osborne said it would be Wednesday when it all "collapses" for her...
https://thedisorderofthings.com/2016/11/28/citizens-of-nowhere/
Great minds think alike!
https://twitter.com/torcuil/status/874665592598474752
Personally, I think if we wanted expansion to work we needed to encourage the formation of a United States of Europe with the federal transfer of (a lot of) money from the rich to the poor with a view to levelling the living standards from Chelsea to Craiova. Alternatively, we should have vetoed the expansion.
What we've had for 13 years is neither one thing nor the other.
I worked for a while in Stoke on the fringes of the construction trade. Quite a few men in their 40's & 50's who had never been to london.
NEVER BEEN TO LONDON.
I was exotic because I came from a different part of the midlands.
*You can all insert your own joke here.
Denis Healey was at Anzio I think too.
You have freely admitted you wish to see the end of the UK with it being subsumed into a federal state.
Ken Clarke in his infamous interview said he looked forward to a day when Parliament was nothing more than a council chamber in Europe. Now whilst it is a perfectly right and proper to hold such views and to campaign for them, they are incompatible with the concept of patriotism and with the belief in national self determination and national sovereignty.
The big BUT of course is that there is nothing in principle wrong with that. You and I share different views of the value of the nation state and of its place in the maintenance of democratic freedoms. Whilst I think you are wrong that does not mean I think you are evil or even mildly naughty. Just that when it comes to the specific concept of patriotism one cannot be a patriot and still believe in the end of the nation state.
Please realise I am in no way critical of you for this. You are continually open about your pro federalist views and that is just as justified a world view as that of Westphalian Sovereignty. It is just not a view I share.
Conservative hold
LAB Bilal Mahmood 20638
CON Iain Duncan Smith 23076
LD Deborah Unger 2043
GRN Sinead King 1204
IDS had a 9000 lead cut by 2/3rds
https://twitter.com/steveballinger/status/874545895290941440
As I have said many times before what I don't understand are those who preach UK Independence from the EU but don't want to allow Scots Independence from the UK.
Last Thurs cheered me up immensely!
May underestimated Corbyn. PB Tories are doing the same now
I have been to Beijing and Shanghai, though
Mr. Stoke, let's stay in the EU, it'll stop our democracy working properly, isn't the best sales line.
Mr. Anorak, I have returned, but I'm a bit tired [still have more work to do] and it's a nuanced area so I'm just going to leave it.