politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Despite the dire polling, Jeremy Corbyn is not going anywhere
Comments
-
They hate us because we deprive them in certain locations of their automatic right to be councilors and run the council, no one else should interfere with that. They also realize that once they start to lose their local government base the parliamentary seat may come into play.Nigel_Foremain said:
Having been a Conservative activist (before the Brexit madness took hold), it is fair to say that in many shires the LibDems are the enemy, more so, and more hated than Labour. I never felt that way, but many of my more moderate Conservative friends have said they could never vote LD (they think I am an oddity), so It is fair to say that for an MP to defect to the LDs would be a very big step indeed.Pulpstar said:
I still think the Lib Dems is a tricky place for centre-right remainers to be content , and Change UK also looks a bit weird with Gapes and Soubry in there. So perhaps just Lee, maybe Grieve but it is a big big step for him.Nigel_Foremain said:
I wonder whether there will be any others?Pulpstar said:
When Philip Lee crosses the floor on the first day back would be my guess.Nigel_Foremain said:Are there any markets on when Bozo loses his working majority?
I note Osborne has decided to hitch to the good ship Boris for the moment...0 -
Nigel_Foremain said:
Having been a Conservative activist (before the Brexit madness took hold), it is fair to say that in many shires the LibDems are the enemy, more so, and more hated than Labour. I never felt that way, but many of my more moderate Conservative friends have said they could never vote LD (they think I am an oddity), so It is fair to say that for an MP to defect to the LDs would be a very big step indeed.Pulpstar said:
I still think the Lib Dems is a tricky place for centre-right remainers to be content , and Change UK also looks a bit weird with Gapes and Soubry in there. So perhaps just Lee, maybe Grieve but it is a big big step for him.Nigel_Foremain said:
I wonder whether there will be any others?Pulpstar said:
When Philip Lee crosses the floor on the first day back would be my guess.Nigel_Foremain said:Are there any markets on when Bozo loses his working majority?
I note Osborne has decided to hitch to the good ship Boris for the moment...Nigel_Foremain said:
Having been a Conservative activist (before the Brexit madness took hold), it is fair to say that in many shires the LibDems are the enemy, more so, and more hated than Labour. I never felt that way, but many of my more moderate Conservative friends have said they could never vote LD (they think I am an oddity), so It is fair to say that for an MP to defect to the LDs would be a very big step indeed.Pulpstar said:
I still think the Lib Dems is a tricky place for centre-right remainers to be content , and Change UK also looks a bit weird with Gapes and Soubry in there. So perhaps just Lee, maybe Grieve but it is a big big step for him.Nigel_Foremain said:
I wonder whether there will be any others?Pulpstar said:
When Philip Lee crosses the floor on the first day back would be my guess.Nigel_Foremain said:Are there any markets on when Bozo loses his working majority?
I note Osborne has decided to hitch to the good ship Boris for the moment...Nigel_Foremain said:Pulpstar said:Nigel_Foremain said:Pulpstar said:
when I dealt with conservative and labour activists they really hated the libdems. Anyone who crossed the floor to the yellow peril was seen as beyond the pale.Nigel_Foremain said:Are there any markets on when Bozo loses his working majority?
0 -
I am an absolute supporter of AV in situations where it benefits the Tory party.TheScreamingEagles said:I might do a thread on AV this weekend.
https://twitter.com/TSEofPB/status/1157301363837194241
0 -
I might not be representative of LDs and I'm probably more of an Orange Booker, but I don't believe LDs can encompass socialists. I have a lot in common with Social Democrats although I come to my views from a different direction to them. I believe in free enterprise and non interference from Govt in most things. I find both Labour and the Conservatives far to interfering and authoritarian. I often feel that much Tory interference appears very socialist to me. At least Labour actually believe in that interference. However I do also believe everyone has an equal right to health, education and protection from discrimination and in that I am different to a libertarian.Richard_Tyndall said:
Whilst obviously I disagree with your political viewpoint, setting that aside and looking seriously at your situation and that of probably tens of thousands of other Labour members, why do the Lib Dems not meet your standards for achieving your political aims? I have long regarded them as being at least as left wing as Labour and I would have thought they could certainly replace Labour as the main party of the left were Corbyn to persist in his refusal to listen to his members. I am surprised we have not seem much larger wholesale defections to the Lib Dems.RochdalePioneers said:Its a great piece Joff, and sadly leaves me asking the same daily question:
1) Why am I still in the Labour Party as what's the point, and
2) If I left, what is the alternative?
I absolutely define myself by Clause 4 of the Party Constitution. Namely:
"The Labour Party is a democratic socialist party. It believes that by the strength of our common endeavour we achieve more than we achieve alone, so as to create for each of us the means to realise our true potential and for all of us a community in which power, wealth and opportunity are in the hands of the many, not the few, where the rights we enjoy reflect the duties we owe, and where we live together, freely, in a spirit of solidarity, tolerance and respect"
The problem is that the Labour Party is increasingly none of those things.
A long time ago I copied this from this site because I thought it spelt out what being a liberal was to me. Sorry I can't credit who wrote it as I can't remember.
a)- Individual freedom (free from government interference)
b)- Free markets (free from government intervention)
c)- Free trade (between all countries not just within the EU) and against protectionism
d)- Free education (up to age 18)
e)- Free health treatment (at the point of delivery)
f)- Welfare for those unable to look after themselves
g)- Health and welfare paid for by a contributory system which qualifies you (a la Beveridge)
h)- A small state so as to let people run their own lives0 -
That is everything that's wrong with our politics.rottenborough said:
The intensity of the sense of being in the Labour family is very strong it seems to me. It is very hard to leave.Richard_Tyndall said:
Whilst obviously I disagree with your political viewpoint, setting that aside and looking seriously at your situation and that of probably tens of thousands of other Labour members, why do the Lib Dems not meet your standards for achieving your political aims? I have long regarded them as being at least as left wing as Labour and I would have thought they could certainly replace Labour as the main party of the left were Corbyn to persist in his refusal to listen to his members. I am surprised we have not seem much larger wholesale defections to the Lib Dems.RochdalePioneers said:Its a great piece Joff, and sadly leaves me asking the same daily question:
1) Why am I still in the Labour Party as what's the point, and
2) If I left, what is the alternative?
I absolutely define myself by Clause 4 of the Party Constitution. Namely:
"The Labour Party is a democratic socialist party. It believes that by the strength of our common endeavour we achieve more than we achieve alone, so as to create for each of us the means to realise our true potential and for all of us a community in which power, wealth and opportunity are in the hands of the many, not the few, where the rights we enjoy reflect the duties we owe, and where we live together, freely, in a spirit of solidarity, tolerance and respect"
The problem is that the Labour Party is increasingly none of those things.0 -
Sorry for making last one difficult to read. Been watching cricket whilst in pub (my excuse and I am sticking to it)0
-
I went to a state school so I have no prejudice on that front. She just sounds like a Corbynite drone. No original thought.dixiedean said:
I actually agree she ain't impressive, but she isn't stupid, and does know about life. It does irk when we have people who actually have come through the state system, and in Long-Bailey's case have worked a string of relatively ordinary jobs in the real world, in order to fund her own education, then get slated for it. It actually shows some bloody enterprise.Tabman said:
I don't know piddock, but long_bailey just doesn't perform well. Nothing to do with her accent; everything to do with her inability to master a briefdixiedean said:I take it criticism of Ms Long-Bailey and Pidcock's "lack of intelligence" is PB code for doesn't sound like they went to private school.
Since one has a MSc, and the other is a solicitor.
Not knowing about the world is code for "doesn't know about people like me." Since they are the children of social worker and of a docker. I should imagine they have plenty of knowledge of the world. Just not the world of most on here.
Then people will moan about the enormous number of private school to Oxbridge to job in politics, MPs we have.1 -
A very good article indeed Joff and thanks for it. As a longstanding Labour person you know what you are talking about.
Here however is the dilemma and why neither Labour nor the LibDems should consider themselves likely to topple Boris Johnson.
Most of the vulnerable Tory seats to the LibDems are in the wealthiest parts of the country and to Labour in the most Brexit supporting parts of the country.
Middle class voters have to decide which is the least worst option, Brexit either with or without a deal or the risk of a Corbyn-led government which would be promising to tax many of them out of their jobs and homes because they wouldn't have enough net salary left to pay the mortgage!
As always with the electorate, I expect personal interest will come first and suffering Brexit is preferable to suffering a catastrophic drop in standard of living!1 -
Pidcock has an MSc in Disaster Management.SouthamObserver said:
Pidcock is the Momentum candidate; Long Bailey is McDonnell’s. It’ll be one of the two as the far-left candidate when the distant day Corbyn finally bows out arrives. Neither is anything but awful though, I agree. If I had to choose, I’d say Pidcock is worse because she’s also a phoney. She’s got the Geordie equivalent of a mockney accent.RochdalePioneers said:Laura Pillock? Leader?
Jesus, shoot me now
No comment.0 -
And that is a manifesto I would subscribe tokjh said:
I might not be representative of LDs and I'm probably more of an Orange Booker, but I don't believe LDs can encompass socialists. I have a lot in common with Social Democrats although I come to my views from a different direction to them. I believe in free enterprise and non interference from Govt in most things. I find both Labour and the Conservatives far to interfering and authoritarian. I often feel that much Tory interference appears very socialist to me. At least Labour actually believe in that interference. However I do also believe everyone has an equal right to health, education and protection from discrimination and in that I am different to a libertarian.Richard_Tyndall said:
Whilst obviously I disagree with your political viewpoint, setting that aside and looking seriously at your situation and that of probably tens of thousands of other Labour members, why do the Lib Dems not meet your standards for achieving your political aims? I have long regarded them as being at least as left wing as Labour and I would have thought they could certainly replace Labour as the main party of the left were Corbyn to persist in his refusal to listen to his members. I am surprised we have not seem much larger wholesale defections to the Lib Dems.RochdalePioneers said:Its a great piece Joff, and sadly leaves me asking the same daily question:
1) Why am I still in the Labour Party as what's the point, and
2) If I left, what is the alternative?
I absolutely define myself by Clause 4 of the Party Constitution. Namely:
"The Labour Party is a democratic socialist party. It believes that by the strength of our common endeavour we achieve more than we achieve alone, so as to create for each of us the means to realise our true potential and for all of us a community in which power, wealth and opportunity are in the hands of the many, not the few, where the rights we enjoy reflect the duties we owe, and where we live together, freely, in a spirit of solidarity, tolerance and respect"
The problem is that the Labour Party is increasingly none of those things.
A long time ago I copied this from this site because I thought it spelt out what being a liberal was to me. Sorry I can't credit who wrote it as I can't remember.
a)- Individual freedom (free from government interference)
b)- Free markets (free from government intervention)
c)- Free trade (between all countries not just within the EU) and against protectionism
d)- Free education (up to age 18)
e)- Free health treatment (at the point of delivery)
f)- Welfare for those unable to look after themselves
g)- Health and welfare paid for by a contributory system which qualifies you (a la Beveridge)
h)- A small state so as to let people run their own lives0 -
I agree 100%kjh said:
I might not be representative of LDs and I'm probably more of an Orange Booker, but I don't believe LDs can encompass socialists. I have a lot in common with Social Democrats although I come to my views from a different direction to them. I believe in free enterprise and non interference from Govt in most things. I find both Labour and the Conservatives far to interfering and authoritarian. I often feel that much Tory interference appears very socialist to me. At least Labour actually believe in that interference. However I do also believe everyone has an equal right to health, education and protection from discrimination and in that I am different to a libertarian.Richard_Tyndall said:
Whilst obviously I disagree with your political viewpoint, setting that aside and looking seriously at your situation and that of probably tens of thousands of other Labour members, why do the Lib Dems not meet your standards for achieving your political aims? I have long regarded them as being at least as left wing as Labour and I would have thought they could certainly replace Labour as the main party of the left were Corbyn to persist in his refusal to listen to his members. I am surprised we have not seem much larger wholesale defections to the Lib Dems.RochdalePioneers said:Its a great piece Joff, and sadly leaves me asking the same daily question:
1) Why am I still in the Labour Party as what's the point, and
2) If I left, what is the alternative?
I absolutely define myself by Clause 4 of the Party Constitution. Namely:
"The Labour Party is a democratic socialist party. It believes that by the strength of our common endeavour we achieve more than we achieve alone, so as to create for each of us the means to realise our true potential and for all of us a community in which power, wealth and opportunity are in the hands of the many, not the few, where the rights we enjoy reflect the duties we owe, and where we live together, freely, in a spirit of solidarity, tolerance and respect"
The problem is that the Labour Party is increasingly none of those things.
A long time ago I copied this from this site because I thought it spelt out what being a liberal was to me. Sorry I can't credit who wrote it as I can't remember.
a)- Individual freedom (free from government interference)
b)- Free markets (free from government intervention)
c)- Free trade (between all countries not just within the EU) and against protectionism
d)- Free education (up to age 18)
e)- Free health treatment (at the point of delivery)
f)- Welfare for those unable to look after themselves
g)- Health and welfare paid for by a contributory system which qualifies you (a la Beveridge)
h)- A small state so as to let people run their own lives
Liberalism is this, and the antithesis of socialism
1 -
Reassuring to know that we are all Democratic Socialists.SouthamObserver said:
Thanks!!RochdalePioneers said:Its a great piece Joff, and sadly leaves me asking the same daily question:
1) Why am I still in the Labour Party as what's the point, and
2) If I left, what is the alternative?
I absolutely define myself by Clause 4 of the Party Constitution. Namely:
"The Labour Party is a democratic socialist party. It believes that by the strength of our common endeavour we achieve more than we achieve alone, so as to create for each of us the means to realise our true potential and for all of us a community in which power, wealth and opportunity are in the hands of the many, not the few, where the rights we enjoy reflect the duties we owe, and where we live together, freely, in a spirit of solidarity, tolerance and respect"
The problem is that the Labour Party is increasingly none of those things.
Labour’s Clause 4 - all of it - is absolutely what I believe in. It’s only a matter of time before the far left rewrites it, though.
Laters...0 -
The take out isn’t who got squeezed, that all depends on chances of being in top two to start with. The take outs from special elections have never been about lost deposits, it’s a red herring media have always been fascinated in that.viewcode said:
"Provided our enemy fights on the ground that we want, we shall be victorious!"IanB2 said:ConHome is remarkably silent today, but here’s the conclusion on LabourList:
“The most worrying thing about this by-election? It has increased the chances of both Remain and Leave alliances in an early election, which could see Labour squeezed out and made irrelevant as they were last night. And there’s not much the party can do about that possibility. Labour will just have to hope that it can shift the broader narrative, rather than ignore it, and that the ever-more-likely snap poll isn’t fought entirely on Brexit.”
[Facepalm]
The important take out from this bi election is what Philip Thompson was saying to us even before the result came in, Brexit got a majority of votes, yet “leave with nothing”. What we need to be watching for in elections is how savvy vote lending is, clearly Labour remain had little trouble lending to Libdem. But there’s a lot of Brexit Labour in wales isn’t there, can’t regard all Labour vote as Libdem to squeeze? To what extent does the party political pull influence the vote lending in the squeeze. If Labour shed remainers to libdems yesterday I reckon they shed leavers too, but who to? Can Labour leavers go to Tory where they need to, or will they stay at home or go Brexit or UKIP? Can Toxic Corbyn squeeze libdem and green of their remainers where he needs to?
That’s the take out, not only from this special election, but elections to come.0 -
1
-
"Truth behind Brexit myth of the ‘left behind’
Philip Collins
Far from being ignored by Westminster, deprived areas of Britain have received extra help but may be beyond saving"
(£)
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/comment/don-t-fall-for-brexit-myth-of-the-left-behind-08kgc8rnp0 -
Mr. Borough, that does raise an interesting point, though.
If we're so integrated in the EU that leaving is impossible, it rather backs up those who said we've integrated too much and those who wanted the promised referendum on Lisbon (and at earlier times too).
"We can't leave, we've integrated too much without bothering to ask you" is not a good look for Remain.
They'd be better framing it as the advantages of the EU.0 -
Can anyone point to the part of the GFA that forbids customs checks, either absolutely or at the border?rottenborough said:
0 -
The lds though they could replace labour in 2017. Better luck 2019?Philip_Thompson said:
Please, please, please, please, please let this happen.Byronic said:Good piece Southam. Succinct and insightful.
However, it is maybe a bit too pessimistic on the post-election outcome. Presuming Corbyn loses the next GE, and loses badly, then he would surely have to go. The pressure from all sides would become too great, and he is also an old man. He would simply give up?
You also ignore the possibility that all of Britain becomes Brecon. And we have a Brexit general election where the Lib Dems entirely replace Labour, who go down under 100 seats. This is far from impossible.
And in that situation it doesn't really matter who leads Labour, they are no longer the Opposition, nor the Government. They are finished.0 -
0
-
Didn't Parliament reject a deal that would have avoided all this?TheScreamingEagles said:0 -
Customs border not mentioned, but it was and is implicitly in the whole atmosphere that finally delivered peace.RobD said:
Can anyone point to the part of the GFA that forbids customs checks, either absolutely or at the border?rottenborough said:0 -
Of course we can leave. But the next point on the road has to be EFTA and not the ridiculous purity of No Deal and unicorn island.Morris_Dancer said:Mr. Borough, that does raise an interesting point, though.
If we're so integrated in the EU that leaving is impossible, it rather backs up those who said we've integrated too much and those who wanted the promised referendum on Lisbon (and at earlier times too).
"We can't leave, we've integrated too much without bothering to ask you" is not a good look for Remain.
They'd be better framing it as the advantages of the EU.0 -
The fanatics on both sides have always done a better job promoting their opponents than their opponents manage promoting themselves.TheScreamingEagles said:0 -
So no then?rottenborough said:
Customs border not mentioned, but it was and is implicitly in the whole atmosphere that finally delivered peace.RobD said:
Can anyone point to the part of the GFA that forbids customs checks, either absolutely or at the border?rottenborough said:
0 -
Cleverly showing himself to be either dim or a cliched stooge today on a couple of occasions I see.0
-
Losing your job through brexit tends to cause a catStrcatast drop in standard of livingNorthCadboll said:A very good article indeed Joff and thanks for it. As a longstanding Labour person you know what you are talking about.
Here however is the dilemma and why neither Labour nor the LibDems should consider themselves likely to topple Boris Johnson.
Most of the vulnerable Tory seats to the LibDems are in the wealthiest parts of the country and to Labour in the most Brexit supporting parts of the country.
Middle class voters have to decide which is the least worst option, Brexit either with or without a deal or the risk of a Corbyn-led government which would be promising to tax many of them out of their jobs and homes because they wouldn't have enough net salary left to pay the mortgage!
As always with the electorate, I expect personal interest will come first and suffering Brexit is preferable to suffering a catastrophic drop in standard of living!0 -
I don’t think anyone is arguing cooperation will end, just an additional bit of paperwork when sending goods.rottenborough said:
Customs border not mentioned, but it was and is implicitly in the whole atmosphere that finally delivered peace.RobD said:
Can anyone point to the part of the GFA that forbids customs checks, either absolutely or at the border?rottenborough said:0 -
TBF the good Friday agreement was quite obsolete the second SF became the largest party on their side.
It's all just goodwill on the Brits part.
Will be interesting to see what happens0 -
No they can't because the existence of a border, hard or soft, is not mentioned once in the whole GFA. The only mention of the border is with regard to cross-border institutions. As such the GFA explicitly recognises that a border exists but has nothing at all to say about what form it should or should not take. Powell is another fuckwit using the threat of a return to the Troubles as blackmail to argue against Brexit.RobD said:
Can anyone point to the part of the GFA that forbids customs checks, either absolutely or at the border?rottenborough said:0 -
Where is the democratic mandate in Northern Ireland to impose this additional border friction?RobD said:
I don’t think anyone is arguing cooperation will end, just an additional bit of paperwork when sending goods.rottenborough said:
Customs border not mentioned, but it was and is implicitly in the whole atmosphere that finally delivered peace.RobD said:
Can anyone point to the part of the GFA that forbids customs checks, either absolutely or at the border?rottenborough said:0 -
It says it should take the form of cooperation as members of the EU.Richard_Tyndall said:
No they can't because the existence of a border, hard or soft, is not mentioned once in the whole GFA. The only mention of the border is with regard to cross-border institutions. As such the GFA explicitly recognises that a border exists but has nothing at all to say about what form it should or should not take. Powell is another fuckwit using the threat of a return to the Troubles as blackmail to argue against Brexit.RobD said:
Can anyone point to the part of the GFA that forbids customs checks, either absolutely or at the border?rottenborough said:
"Wishing to develop still further the unique relationship between their peoples and the close co-operation between their countries as friendly neighbours and as partners in the European Union"
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/136652/agreement.pdf0 -
Bullshit from Leavers that's what that is.Morris_Dancer said:Mr. Borough, that does raise an interesting point, though.
If we're so integrated in the EU that leaving is impossible, it rather backs up those who said we've integrated too much and those who wanted the promised referendum on Lisbon (and at earlier times too).
"We can't leave, we've integrated too much without bothering to ask you" is not a good look for Remain.
They'd be better framing it as the advantages of the EU.
It is possible to the Leave the EU, but not on the terms that Vote Leave said we could, because that was a fantasy.
Now if say Hungary left the EU, they wouldn't have the problem of the Belfast Agreement, so no we haven't integrated too deeply, we signed up to a deal that has by and large ended the bloodshed in Northern Ireland and the bloodshed that had spread to the mainland.
The architects of the Belfast Agreement warned this would happen during the referendum but you chose to ignore them.0 -
The 2016 EU referendumwilliamglenn said:
Where is the democratic mandate in Northern Ireland to impose this additional border friction?RobD said:
I don’t think anyone is arguing cooperation will end, just an additional bit of paperwork when sending goods.rottenborough said:
Customs border not mentioned, but it was and is implicitly in the whole atmosphere that finally delivered peace.RobD said:
Can anyone point to the part of the GFA that forbids customs checks, either absolutely or at the border?rottenborough said:0 -
How does the backstop change that? We won’t be a member of the EU.williamglenn said:
It says it should take the form of cooperation as members of the EU.Richard_Tyndall said:
No they can't because the existence of a border, hard or soft, is not mentioned once in the whole GFA. The only mention of the border is with regard to cross-border institutions. As such the GFA explicitly recognises that a border exists but has nothing at all to say about what form it should or should not take. Powell is another fuckwit using the threat of a return to the Troubles as blackmail to argue against Brexit.RobD said:
Can anyone point to the part of the GFA that forbids customs checks, either absolutely or at the border?rottenborough said:
"Wishing to develop still further the unique relationship between their peoples and the close co-operation between their countries as friendly neighbours and as partners in the European Union"
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/136652/agreement.pdf0 -
Except nothing Vote Leave promised breaks the letter of the GFA, we just get told about the "spirit" of it.TheScreamingEagles said:
Bullshit from Leavers that's what that is.Morris_Dancer said:Mr. Borough, that does raise an interesting point, though.
If we're so integrated in the EU that leaving is impossible, it rather backs up those who said we've integrated too much and those who wanted the promised referendum on Lisbon (and at earlier times too).
"We can't leave, we've integrated too much without bothering to ask you" is not a good look for Remain.
They'd be better framing it as the advantages of the EU.
It is possible to the Leave the EU, but not on the terms that Vote Leave said we could, because that was a fantasy.
Now if say Hungary left the EU, they wouldn't have the problem of the Belfast Agreement, so no we haven't integrated too deeply, we signed up to a deal that has by and large ended the bloodshed in Northern Ireland and the bloodshed that had spread to the mainland.
The architects of the Belfast Agreement warned this would happen during the referendum but you chose to ignore them.
I don't believe in a Holy Spirit.0 -
Muddled thinking:kjh said:
I might not be representative of LDs and I'm probably more of an Orange Booker, but I don't believe LDs can encompass socialists. I have a lot in common with Social Democrats although I come to my views from a different direction to them. I believe in free enterprise and non interference from Govt in most things. I find both Labour and the Conservatives far to interfering and authoritarian. I often feel that much Tory interference appears very socialist to me. At least Labour actually believe in that interference. However I do also believe everyone has an equal right to health, education and protection from discrimination and in that I am different to a libertarian.Richard_Tyndall said:
Whilst obviously I disagree with your political viewpoint, setting that aside and looking seriously at your situation and that of probably tens of thousands of other Labour members, why do the Lib Dems not meet your standards for achieving your political aims? I have long regarded them as being at least as left wing as Labour and I would have thought they could certainly replace Labour as the main party of the left were Corbyn to persist in his refusal to listen to his members. I am surprised we have not seem much larger wholesale defections to the Lib Dems.RochdalePioneers said:
I absolutely define myself by Clause 4 of the Party Constitution. Namely:
"The Labour Party is a democratic socialist party. It believes that by the strength of our common endeavour we achieve more than we achieve alone, so as to create for each of us the means to realise our true potential and for all of us a community in which power, wealth and opportunity are in the hands of the many, not the few, where the rights we enjoy reflect the duties we owe, and where we live together, freely, in a spirit of solidarity, tolerance and respect"
The problem is that the Labour Party is increasingly none of those things.
A long time ago I copied this from this site because I thought it spelt out what being a liberal was to me. Sorry I can't credit who wrote it as I can't remember.
a)- Individual freedom (free from government interference)
b)- Free markets (free from government intervention)
c)- Free trade (between all countries not just within the EU) and against protectionism
d)- Free education (up to age 18)
e)- Free health treatment (at the point of delivery)
f)- Welfare for those unable to look after themselves
g)- Health and welfare paid for by a contributory system which qualifies you (a la Beveridge)
h)- A small state so as to let people run their own lives
g) contradicts e) and f)
b) contradicts d) and e) - you can't have truly free markets if the state is the mian provider.
0 -
So like I said no mention of borders at all then.williamglenn said:
It says it should take the form of cooperation as members of the EU.Richard_Tyndall said:
No they can't because the existence of a border, hard or soft, is not mentioned once in the whole GFA. The only mention of the border is with regard to cross-border institutions. As such the GFA explicitly recognises that a border exists but has nothing at all to say about what form it should or should not take. Powell is another fuckwit using the threat of a return to the Troubles as blackmail to argue against Brexit.RobD said:
Can anyone point to the part of the GFA that forbids customs checks, either absolutely or at the border?rottenborough said:
"Wishing to develop still further the unique relationship between their peoples and the close co-operation between their countries as friendly neighbours and as partners in the European Union"
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/136652/agreement.pdf
And if it is the case that that sentence means we are unable to leave the EU ever because membership of the EU is defined within the GFA then Lilico is right and the GFA is dead.0 -
Was that before or after the Irish chose by referendum to amend the Treaties of the European Union to add Article 50?williamglenn said:
It says it should take the form of cooperation as members of the EU.Richard_Tyndall said:
No they can't because the existence of a border, hard or soft, is not mentioned once in the whole GFA. The only mention of the border is with regard to cross-border institutions. As such the GFA explicitly recognises that a border exists but has nothing at all to say about what form it should or should not take. Powell is another fuckwit using the threat of a return to the Troubles as blackmail to argue against Brexit.RobD said:
Can anyone point to the part of the GFA that forbids customs checks, either absolutely or at the border?rottenborough said:
"Wishing to develop still further the unique relationship between their peoples and the close co-operation between their countries as friendly neighbours and as partners in the European Union"
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/136652/agreement.pdf0 -
Nope.JBriskinindyref2 said:
The 2016 EU referendumwilliamglenn said:
Where is the democratic mandate in Northern Ireland to impose this additional border friction?RobD said:
I don’t think anyone is arguing cooperation will end, just an additional bit of paperwork when sending goods.rottenborough said:
Customs border not mentioned, but it was and is implicitly in the whole atmosphere that finally delivered peace.RobD said:
Can anyone point to the part of the GFA that forbids customs checks, either absolutely or at the border?rottenborough said:
Leave: 349,442 (44.2%)
Remain: 470,707 (55.8%)0 -
Do those of you right wing posters calling Corbyn and his crew Marxist and communist genuinely believe it from his policy platform, or are you just ignorant and lazy?
Corbyns Labour today is more more Keynesian than Marxist
Firstly the manifesto they fought on 2017 was to the right of Labour manifesto’s 1983 and prior. It was an argument for return to social market economics of the post war consensus, the greater state intervention in key industry as practised by Tory governments. Where’s the realism in your Marxism/communism claim when Corbyn platform is for less nationalisation, less government intervention, and lower levels of taxation than the era Conservative Primeminster Supermac told us we’ve never had it so good? Secondly and conclusively, Marxists are not small c conservatives at heart like Corbyn, McD and others around them in the labour party. Marxists are intent to change the world, Labour went in to the 2017 election devoid of plans to abolish the monarchy abolish the House of Lords or close the ‘public’ schools, to disestablish church and state and bring the UK electoral system into the 21st century with a a single-chamber parliament with proportional representation. The big majority of members of Corbyns cabinet are pro EU, in other words undemocratic and neo-liberal as Marxists would see it.
Unless of course you are basing your opinions what they are and will do on something other than their stated policies and manifesto’s. Like a fantasy of spin between your ears? Then more fool you and any who listen to you, because that’s not the reality of British democracy and how it works because everybody could then take the game to that silly extreme and not make attempt to understand opponents. Because Many of these policies would be regarded as mainstream in most European countries. Oh. Doesn’t that say something about how we’ve allowed the UK to get ridiculous out of touch with the 21st century.
0 -
In much the same way as the Scottish parliament is rendered obsolete by nationalist majorities.JBriskinindyref2 said:TBF the good Friday agreement was quite obsolete the second SF became the largest party on their side.
It's all just goodwill on the Brits part.
Will be interesting to see what happens
What's the crime the Catalonians got done for - was it "Sedition" or something.
Time to get that on our statue books asap.0 -
The Article 50 process provides for the negotiation of a withdrawal agreement to address such issues. This was done to the satisfaction of both governments.Philip_Thompson said:
Was that before or after the Irish chose by referendum to amend the Treaties of the European Union to add Article 50?williamglenn said:
It says it should take the form of cooperation as members of the EU.Richard_Tyndall said:
No they can't because the existence of a border, hard or soft, is not mentioned once in the whole GFA. The only mention of the border is with regard to cross-border institutions. As such the GFA explicitly recognises that a border exists but has nothing at all to say about what form it should or should not take. Powell is another fuckwit using the threat of a return to the Troubles as blackmail to argue against Brexit.RobD said:
Can anyone point to the part of the GFA that forbids customs checks, either absolutely or at the border?rottenborough said:
"Wishing to develop still further the unique relationship between their peoples and the close co-operation between their countries as friendly neighbours and as partners in the European Union"
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/136652/agreement.pdf0 -
I've yet to hear one reason why the Irish can have a border they desire for Corporation Tax, a border they desire for VAT, a border they desire for Income Tax, a border they desire for Abortion, but a border for customs duties is beyond the pale?Richard_Tyndall said:
So like I said no mention of borders at all then.williamglenn said:
It says it should take the form of cooperation as members of the EU.Richard_Tyndall said:
No they can't because the existence of a border, hard or soft, is not mentioned once in the whole GFA. The only mention of the border is with regard to cross-border institutions. As such the GFA explicitly recognises that a border exists but has nothing at all to say about what form it should or should not take. Powell is another fuckwit using the threat of a return to the Troubles as blackmail to argue against Brexit.RobD said:
Can anyone point to the part of the GFA that forbids customs checks, either absolutely or at the border?rottenborough said:
"Wishing to develop still further the unique relationship between their peoples and the close co-operation between their countries as friendly neighbours and as partners in the European Union"
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/136652/agreement.pdf
And if it is the case that that sentence means we are unable to leave the EU ever because membership of the EU is defined within the GFA then Lilico is right and the GFA is dead.
The border already exists. The Irish are against harmonising taxes.0 -
Conservatives - Whining Here!TheScreamingEagles said:I might do a thread on AV this weekend.
https://twitter.com/TSEofPB/status/11573013638371942410 -
I assume your quoting NI figures. It was a UK wide ref with a million majority for leavewilliamglenn said:
Nope.JBriskinindyref2 said:
The 2016 EU referendumwilliamglenn said:
Where is the democratic mandate in Northern Ireland to impose this additional border friction?RobD said:
I don’t think anyone is arguing cooperation will end, just an additional bit of paperwork when sending goods.rottenborough said:
Customs border not mentioned, but it was and is implicitly in the whole atmosphere that finally delivered peace.RobD said:
Can anyone point to the part of the GFA that forbids customs checks, either absolutely or at the border?rottenborough said:
Leave: 349,442 (44.2%)
Remain: 470,707 (55.8%)0 -
No it wasn't, the British Parliament and thus the British government rejected the withdrawal agreement. We don't have an elected dictatorship of a PM, Parliament is part of our governance too.williamglenn said:
The Article 50 process provides for the negotiation of a withdrawal agreement to address such issues. This was done to the satisfaction of both governments.Philip_Thompson said:
Was that before or after the Irish chose by referendum to amend the Treaties of the European Union to add Article 50?williamglenn said:
It says it should take the form of cooperation as members of the EU.Richard_Tyndall said:
No they can't because the existence of a border, hard or soft, is not mentioned once in the whole GFA. The only mention of the border is with regard to cross-border institutions. As such the GFA explicitly recognises that a border exists but has nothing at all to say about what form it should or should not take. Powell is another fuckwit using the threat of a return to the Troubles as blackmail to argue against Brexit.RobD said:
Can anyone point to the part of the GFA that forbids customs checks, either absolutely or at the border?rottenborough said:
"Wishing to develop still further the unique relationship between their peoples and the close co-operation between their countries as friendly neighbours and as partners in the European Union"
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/136652/agreement.pdf
The Article 50 process also provides for No Deal at the end of the period and a clean break then if there is no ratified agreement.0 -
It's very simple. Some forms of divergence between jurisdictions inhibit cross-border trade and daily life, and other forms don't.Philip_Thompson said:
I've yet to hear one reason why the Irish can have a border they desire for Corporation Tax, a border they desire for VAT, a border they desire for Income Tax, a border they desire for Abortion, but a border for customs duties is beyond the pale?Richard_Tyndall said:
So like I said no mention of borders at all then.williamglenn said:
It says it should take the form of cooperation as members of the EU.Richard_Tyndall said:
No they can't because the existence of a border, hard or soft, is not mentioned once in the whole GFA. The only mention of the border is with regard to cross-border institutions. As such the GFA explicitly recognises that a border exists but has nothing at all to say about what form it should or should not take. Powell is another fuckwit using the threat of a return to the Troubles as blackmail to argue against Brexit.RobD said:
Can anyone point to the part of the GFA that forbids customs checks, either absolutely or at the border?rottenborough said:
"Wishing to develop still further the unique relationship between their peoples and the close co-operation between their countries as friendly neighbours and as partners in the European Union"
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/136652/agreement.pdf
And if it is the case that that sentence means we are unable to leave the EU ever because membership of the EU is defined within the GFA then Lilico is right and the GFA is dead.
The border already exists. The Irish are against harmonising taxes.0 -
Fine. Like you I like free markets, a lack of government intervention and a small state.Tabman said:
I agree 100%kjh said:
I might not be representative of LDs and I'm probably more of an Orange Booker, but I don't believe LDs can encompass socialists. I have a lot in common with Social Democrats although I come to my views from a different direction to them. I believe in free enterprise and non interference from Govt in most things. I find both Labour and the Conservatives far to interfering and authoritarian. I often feel that much Tory interference appears very socialist to me. At least Labour actually believe in that interference. However I do also believe everyone has an equal right to health, education and protection from discrimination and in that I am different to a libertarian.Richard_Tyndall said:
Whilst obviously I disagree with your political viewpoint, setting that aside and looking seriously at your situation and that of probably tens of thousands of other Labour members, why do the Lib Dems not meet your standards for achieving your political aims? I have long regarded them as being at least as left wing as Labour and I would have thought they could certainly replace Labour as the main party of the left were Corbyn to persist in his refusal to listen to his members. I am surprised we have not seem much larger wholesale defections to the Lib Dems.RochdalePioneers said:Its a great piece Joff, and sadly leaves me asking the same daily question:
The problem is that the Labour Party is increasingly none of those things.
A long time ago I copied this from this site because I thought it spelt out what being a liberal was to me. Sorry I can't credit who wrote it as I can't remember.
a)- Individual freedom (free from government interference)
b)- Free markets (free from government intervention)
c)- Free trade (between all countries not just within the EU) and against protectionism
d)- Free education (up to age 18)
e)- Free health treatment (at the point of delivery)
f)- Welfare for those unable to look after themselves
g)- Health and welfare paid for by a contributory system which qualifies you (a la Beveridge)
h)- A small state so as to let people run their own lives
Liberalism is this, and the antithesis of socialism
But, what about the need to prevent exploitation. You cannot educate people to avoid them being exploited or abused. And that means state interference.
I came to the old Liberal Party because I didn't like the way the Labour Party was (then) controlled by the block vote of the trade unions. I stayed with the LibDems at least partly out of habit and because I found people like Charlie Kennedy worth following. ' Blairite social democracy I find appealing, although Iraq 'did it' for me.
0 -
This is the policy of the British government, which precludes a GB vote from determining the relationship between NI and Ireland:JBriskinindyref2 said:
I assume your quoting NI figures. It was a UK wide ref with a million majority for leavewilliamglenn said:
Nope.JBriskinindyref2 said:
The 2016 EU referendumwilliamglenn said:
Where is the democratic mandate in Northern Ireland to impose this additional border friction?RobD said:
I don’t think anyone is arguing cooperation will end, just an additional bit of paperwork when sending goods.rottenborough said:
Customs border not mentioned, but it was and is implicitly in the whole atmosphere that finally delivered peace.RobD said:
Can anyone point to the part of the GFA that forbids customs checks, either absolutely or at the border?rottenborough said:
Leave: 349,442 (44.2%)
Remain: 470,707 (55.8%)
"The British Government agree that it is for the people of the island of Ireland alone, by agreement between the two parts respectively, to exercise their right of self-determination on the basis of consent, freely and concurrently given, North and South, to bring about a united Ireland, if that is their wish. They reaffirm as a binding obligation that they will, for their part, introduce the necessary legislation to give effect to this, or equally to any measure of agreement on future relationships in Ireland which the people living in Ireland may themselves freely so determine without external impediment."
The people of Northern Ireland did not give consent to be taken out of the single market and customs union. Any form of Brexit that seeks to impose this on them is unacceptable and shames the UK.0 -
Mr. Borough, it is ironic that the majority pro-EU MPs have voted exactly in line with the no deal small minority to lead us towards that path.0
-
Naughty Rob and tbh to keep making the point you think you are making betrays a deep misunderstanding of the history and current situation of Northern Ireland.RobD said:
Can anyone point to the part of the GFA that forbids customs checks, either absolutely or at the border?rottenborough said:
No shame in not knowing its history but you are making a bit of a fool of yourself by not giving up this line.0 -
Wow damning quote (from presumably the now obsolete GFA)williamglenn said:
This is the policy of the British government, which precludes a GB vote from determining the relationship between NI and Ireland:JBriskinindyref2 said:
I assume your quoting NI figures. It was a UK wide ref with a million majority for leavewilliamglenn said:
Nope.JBriskinindyref2 said:
The 2016 EU referendumwilliamglenn said:
Where is the democratic mandate in Northern Ireland to impose this additional border friction?RobD said:
I don’t think anyone is arguing cooperation will end, just an additional bit of paperwork when sending goods.rottenborough said:
Customs border not mentioned, but it was and is implicitly in the whole atmosphere that finally delivered peace.RobD said:
Can anyone point to the part of the GFA that forbids customs checks, either absolutely or at the border?rottenborough said:
Leave: 349,442 (44.2%)
Remain: 470,707 (55.8%)
"The British Government agree that it is for the people of the island of Ireland alone, by agreement between the two parts respectively, to exercise their right of self-determination on the basis of consent, freely and concurrently given, North and South, to bring about a united Ireland, if that is their wish. They reaffirm as a binding obligation that they will, for their part, introduce the necessary legislation to give effect to this, or equally to any measure of agreement on future relationships in Ireland which the people living in Ireland may themselves freely so determine without external impediment."
The people of Northern Ireland did not give consent to be taken out of the single market and customs union. Any form of Brexit that seeks to impose this on them is unacceptable and shames the UK.
I guess we're remaining then.
And the theory that it is impossible to leave the EU remains intact.0 -
You can register as a supporter without having to pay anything or commit to the formality of membership:Nigel_Foremain said:
I don't think I will join the LDs, but I will lend them my vote until sanity is restored to the Conservative Party (not happening soon!). Interesting to know whether Labour or Conservatives have the "softer" moderate supporters, and in what quantityEl_Capitano said:Good piece. My takeaway:
FPTP makes multi-party coalitions difficult. The junior partner is obliterated, as we saw with Cameron/Clegg. So there will be no multi-party coalitions any time soon - not Lab/LD, not Con/Brexit. (The possible exception is where one party is dominant in a region, a la SNP.)
Historically the only parties capable of winning power are those which are already internal coalitions. Cameron before he blew it, Blair, Thatcher etc.
@SouthamObserver’s piece demonstrates that Labour is not going to return to that for many years. ABDPJohnson’s hard Brexit Cabinet shows that the Conservatives, too, have abandoned the logic of the internal coalition, which even May tried to preserve.
There is one inescapable conclusion from this, which is that sane social democrats like @RochdalePioneers need to join the party formed as an internal coalition between social democrats and liberals.
But then I would say that.
https://libdems.secure.force.com/LiberalDemocrats/SupporterJoining
Edit/ apologies if you already have.
0 -
Just because you act conceited does not make you right.TOPPING said:
Naughty Rob and tbh to keep making the point you think you are making betrays a deep misunderstanding of the history and current situation of Northern Ireland.RobD said:
Can anyone point to the part of the GFA that forbids customs checks, either absolutely or at the border?rottenborough said:
No shame in not knowing its history but you are making a bit of a fool of yourself by not giving up this line.0 -
Good post.Zephyr said:Do those of you right wing posters calling Corbyn and his crew Marxist and communist genuinely believe it from his policy platform, or are you just ignorant and lazy?
Corbyns Labour today is more more Keynesian than Marxist
Firstly the manifesto they fought on 2017 was to the right of Labour manifesto’s 1983 and prior. It was an argument for return to social market economics of the post war consensus, the greater state intervention in key industry as practised by Tory governments. Where’s the realism in your Marxism/communism claim when Corbyn platform is for less nationalisation, less government intervention, and lower levels of taxation than the era Conservative Primeminster Supermac told us we’ve never had it so good? Secondly and conclusively, Marxists are not small c conservatives at heart like Corbyn, McD and others around them in the labour party. Marxists are intent to change the world, Labour went in to the 2017 election devoid of plans to abolish the monarchy abolish the House of Lords or close the ‘public’ schools, to disestablish church and state and bring the UK electoral system into the 21st century with a a single-chamber parliament with proportional representation. The big majority of members of Corbyns cabinet are pro EU, in other words undemocratic and neo-liberal as Marxists would see it.
Unless of course you are basing your opinions what they are and will do on something other than their stated policies and manifesto’s. Like a fantasy of spin between your ears? Then more fool you and any who listen to you, because that’s not the reality of British democracy and how it works because everybody could then take the game to that silly extreme and not make attempt to understand opponents. Because Many of these policies would be regarded as mainstream in most European countries. Oh. Doesn’t that say something about how we’ve allowed the UK to get ridiculous out of touch with the 21st century.
They are still dangerous loons but I accept not Marxist.0 -
Terrible news for Scottish unionists if not even mighty Britannia can succeed in extricating itself from the EU. What's the point of the union then?JBriskinindyref2 said:I guess we're remaining then.
And the theory that it is impossible to leave the EU remains intact.0 -
Good post.Zephyr said:Do those of you right wing posters calling Corbyn and his crew Marxist and communist genuinely believe it from his policy platform, or are you just ignorant and lazy?
Corbyns Labour today is more more Keynesian than Marxist
Firstly the manifesto they fought on 2017 was to the right of Labour manifesto’s 1983 and prior. It was an argument for return to social market economics of the post war consensus, the greater state intervention in key industry as practised by Tory governments. Where’s the realism in your Marxism/communism claim when Corbyn platform is for less nationalisation, less government intervention, and lower levels of taxation than the era Conservative Primeminster Supermac told us we’ve never had it so good? Secondly and conclusively, Marxists are not small c conservatives at heart like Corbyn, McD and others around them in the labour party. Marxists are intent to change the world, Labour went in to the 2017 election devoid of plans to abolish the monarchy abolish the House of Lords or close the ‘public’ schools, to disestablish church and state and bring the UK electoral system into the 21st century with a a single-chamber parliament with proportional representation. The big majority of members of Corbyns cabinet are pro EU, in other words undemocratic and neo-liberal as Marxists would see it.
Unless of course you are basing your opinions what they are and will do on something other than their stated policies and manifesto’s. Like a fantasy of spin between your ears? Then more fool you and any who listen to you, because that’s not the reality of British democracy and how it works because everybody could then take the game to that silly extreme and not make attempt to understand opponents. Because Many of these policies would be regarded as mainstream in most European countries. Oh. Doesn’t that say something about how we’ve allowed the UK to get ridiculous out of touch with the 21st century.
I think there is a lot of lazy thinking on here at times.0 -
Hmm, let's see what the Shadow Chancellor himself says. From the Repository of All Human Knowledge:TOPPING said:Good post.
They are still dangerous loons but I accept not Marxist.
In 2006, McDonnell said that "Marx, Lenin and Trotsky" were his "most significant" intellectual influences. Footage emerged of McDonnell in 2013 talking about the 2008 global financial crisis and stating, "I've been waiting for this for a generation! We’ve got to demand systemic change. Look, I’m straight, I’m honest with people: I’m a Marxist." He was accused of celebrating the global financial crisis, McDonnell denied the allegation and claimed he was "joking".
During an interview with Andrew Marr when the footage was played and McDonnell was asked, "Are you a Marxist?", he replied: "I believe there's a lot to learn from reading Kapital, yes of course there is, and that's been recommended not just by me but many others, mainstream economists as well". In 2018, McDonnell attended the Marx 200 conference and stated that "Marxism is about the freedom of spirit, the development of life chances, the enhancement of democracy"
Looks pretty damned much like a Marxist to me. @Zephyr has been misled by the fact that McDonnell knows he has to get elected first, which is why the policies officially espoused so far are merely extreme left-wing rather than all-out Marxist.1 -
For you, and Tyndall, as with Rob. There is sadly no way to be able to make a comment on Northern Ireland without understanding the history and context.Philip_Thompson said:
I've yet to hear one reason why the Irish can have a border they desire for Corporation Tax, a border they desire for VAT, a border they desire for Income Tax, a border they desire for Abortion, but a border for customs duties is beyond the pale?Richard_Tyndall said:
So like I said no mention of borders at all then.williamglenn said:
It says it should take the form of cooperation as members of the EU.Richard_Tyndall said:
No they can't because the existence of a border, hard or soft, is not mentioned once in the whole GFA. The only mention of the border is with regard to cross-border institutions. As such the GFA explicitly recognises that a border exists but has nothing at all to say about what form it should or should not take. Powell is another fuckwit using the threat of a return to the Troubles as blackmail to argue against Brexit.RobD said:
Can anyone point to the part of the GFA that forbids customs checks, either absolutely or at the border?rottenborough said:
"Wishing to develop still further the unique relationship between their peoples and the close co-operation between their countries as friendly neighbours and as partners in the European Union"
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/136652/agreement.pdf
And if it is the case that that sentence means we are unable to leave the EU ever because membership of the EU is defined within the GFA then Lilico is right and the GFA is dead.
The border already exists. The Irish are against harmonising taxes.
On the page everything seems pretty straightforward but it is far more complicated and nuanced.
As a start understanding that there are customs borders not to check that people are compliant but to catch those who are not compliant is a big step forward for you guys.
0 -
Ja Ja,williamglenn said:
Terrible news for Scottish unionists if not even mighty Britannia can succeed in extricating itself from the EU. What's the point of the union then?JBriskinindyref2 said:I guess we're remaining then.
And the theory that it is impossible to leave the EU remains intact.
Ich bin ein European.
(I'm practising my European in preparedness for the EU Super-state.)0 -
Yet your ignorance certainly makes you wrong.Philip_Thompson said:
Just because you act conceited does not make you right.TOPPING said:
Naughty Rob and tbh to keep making the point you think you are making betrays a deep misunderstanding of the history and current situation of Northern Ireland.RobD said:
Can anyone point to the part of the GFA that forbids customs checks, either absolutely or at the border?rottenborough said:
No shame in not knowing its history but you are making a bit of a fool of yourself by not giving up this line.0 -
The 4Ms seem to be loons and presumably make Corbyn a loon if he says exactly what they tell him. I don't think McDonnell is remotely loony any more. He's become more pragmatic in his dotage. He was a bit loony when he was running the GLC with Livingstone but that was 35 yrs ago.TOPPING said:
Good post.Zephyr said:Do those of you right wing posters calling Corbyn and his crew Marxist and communist genuinely believe it from his policy platform, or are you just ignorant and lazy?
Corbyns Labour today is more more Keynesian than Marxist
Firstly the manifesto they fought on 2017 was to the right of Labour manifesto’s 1983 and prior. It was an argument for return to social market economics of the post war consensus, the greater state intervention in key industry as practised by Tory governments. Where’s the realism in your Marxism/communism claim when Corbyn platform is for less nationalisation, less government intervention, and lower levels of taxation than the era Conservative Primeminster Supermac told us we’ve never had it so good? Secondly and conclusively, Marxists are not small c conservatives at heart like Corbyn, McD and others around them in the labour party. Marxists are intent to change the world, Labour went in to the 2017 election devoid of plans to abolish the monarchy abolish the House of Lords or close the ‘public’ schools, to disestablish church and state and bring the UK electoral system into the 21st century with a a single-chamber parliament with proportional representation. The big majority of members of Corbyns cabinet are pro EU, in other words undemocratic and neo-liberal as Marxists would see it.
Unless of course you are basing your opinions what they are and will do on something other than their stated policies and manifesto’s. Like a fantasy of spin between your ears? Then more fool you and any who listen to you, because that’s not the reality of British democracy and how it works because everybody could then take the game to that silly extreme and not make attempt to understand opponents. Because Many of these policies would be regarded as mainstream in most European countries. Oh. Doesn’t that say something about how we’ve allowed the UK to get ridiculous out of touch with the 21st century.
They are still dangerous loons but I accept not Marxist.
I don't want a single chamber with PR. That's dangerous too without a written constitution. Just look at the results in Wales and Scotland of 'PR' systems designed I think for no party ever to get an absolute majority.
I want the added safeguard of a 2nd chamber, a written constitution, or both.0 -
Maybe but I can't see a Labour government implementing Marxist policies. But then I couldn't see a conservative one overseeing a no deal Brexit.Richard_Nabavi said:
Hmm, let's see what the Shadow Chancellor himself says. From the Repository of All Human Knowledge:TOPPING said:Good post.
They are still dangerous loons but I accept not Marxist.
In 2006, McDonnell said that "Marx, Lenin and Trotsky" were his "most significant" intellectual influences. Footage emerged of McDonnell in 2013 talking about the 2008 global financial crisis and stating, "I've been waiting for this for a generation! We’ve got to demand systemic change. Look, I’m straight, I’m honest with people: I’m a Marxist." He was accused of celebrating the global financial crisis, McDonnell denied the allegation and claimed he was "joking".
During an interview with Andrew Marr when the footage was played and McDonnell was asked, "Are you a Marxist?", he replied: "I believe there's a lot to learn from reading Kapital, yes of course there is, and that's been recommended not just by me but many others, mainstream economists as well". In 2018, McDonnell attended the Marx 200 conference and stated that "Marxism is about the freedom of spirit, the development of life chances, the enhancement of democracy"
Looks pretty damned much like a Marxist to me. @Zephyr has been misled by the fact that McDonnell knows he has to get elected first, which is why the policies espoused so far are merely extreme left-wing rather than all-out Marxist.0 -
I hope you are getting fit for the European army basic fitness test.JBriskinindyref2 said:
Ja Ja,williamglenn said:
Terrible news for Scottish unionists if not even mighty Britannia can succeed in extricating itself from the EU. What's the point of the union then?JBriskinindyref2 said:I guess we're remaining then.
And the theory that it is impossible to leave the EU remains intact.
Ich bin ein European.
(I'm practising my European in preparedness for the EU Super-state.)0 -
-
Nein Nein not with my gammy leg and all.TOPPING said:
I hope you are getting fit for the European army basic fitness test.JBriskinindyref2 said:
Ja Ja,williamglenn said:
Terrible news for Scottish unionists if not even mighty Britannia can succeed in extricating itself from the EU. What's the point of the union then?JBriskinindyref2 said:I guess we're remaining then.
And the theory that it is impossible to leave the EU remains intact.
Ich bin ein European.
(I'm practising my European in preparedness for the EU Super-state.)0 -
Don't want to blow my own trumpet but I won the prediction competition on the VoteUK discussion forum for forecasting the result of the Brecon & Radnor by-election. There were about 20 entries altogether. My prediction was LD 45, Con 37, BRX 11, Lab 5.5, Others 1.5.3
-
Well, one can quibble about definitions, but nationalisation without proper compensation goes a long way down the route to Marxism.TOPPING said:Maybe but I can't see a Labour government implementing Marxist policies.
1 -
0
-
I strongly suspect that if there was a referendum on the unification with the electorate of UK (inc NI) and the RoI able to vote, reunification would win by a considerable distance.JBriskinindyref2 said:
Wow damning quote (from presumably the now obsolete GFA)williamglenn said:
This is the policy of the British government, which precludes a GB vote from determining the relationship between NI and Ireland:JBriskinindyref2 said:
I assume your quoting NI figures. It was a UK wide ref with a million majority for leavewilliamglenn said:
Nope.JBriskinindyref2 said:
The 2016 EU referendumwilliamglenn said:
Where is the democratic mandate in Northern Ireland to impose this additional border friction?RobD said:
I don’t think anyone is arguing cooperation will end, just an additional bit of paperwork when sending goods.rottenborough said:
Customs border not mentioned, but it was and is implicitly in the whole atmosphere that finally delivered peace.RobD said:
Can anyone point to the part of the GFA that forbids customs checks, either absolutely or at the border?rottenborough said:
Leave: 349,442 (44.2%)
Remain: 470,707 (55.8%)
"The British Government agree that it is for the people of the island of Ireland alone, by agreement between the two parts respectively, to exercise their right of self-determination on the basis of consent, freely and concurrently given, North and South, to bring about a united Ireland, if that is their wish. They reaffirm as a binding obligation that they will, for their part, introduce the necessary legislation to give effect to this, or equally to any measure of agreement on future relationships in Ireland which the people living in Ireland may themselves freely so determine without external impediment."
The people of Northern Ireland did not give consent to be taken out of the single market and customs union. Any form of Brexit that seeks to impose this on them is unacceptable and shames the UK.
I guess we're remaining then.
And the theory that it is impossible to leave the EU remains intact.0 -
Your trumpet is well blown!AndyJS said:Don't want to blow my own trumpet but I won the prediction competition on the VoteUK discussion forum for forecasting the result of the Brecon & Radnor by-election. There were about 20 entries altogether. My prediction was LD 45, Con 37, BRX 11, Lab 5.5, Others 1.5.
0 -
It was unavoidable.Richard_Nabavi said:
Your trumpet is well blown!AndyJS said:Don't want to blow my own trumpet but I won the prediction competition on the VoteUK discussion forum for forecasting the result of the Brecon & Radnor by-election. There were about 20 entries altogether. My prediction was LD 45, Con 37, BRX 11, Lab 5.5, Others 1.5.
0 -
So for you Tommy, the war will not yet begin...JBriskinindyref2 said:
Nein Nein not with my gammy leg and all.TOPPING said:
I hope you are getting fit for the European army basic fitness test.JBriskinindyref2 said:
Ja Ja,williamglenn said:
Terrible news for Scottish unionists if not even mighty Britannia can succeed in extricating itself from the EU. What's the point of the union then?JBriskinindyref2 said:I guess we're remaining then.
And the theory that it is impossible to leave the EU remains intact.
Ich bin ein European.
(I'm practising my European in preparedness for the EU Super-state.)0 -
Well done, Sir - that was an impressive prediction.AndyJS said:
It was unavoidable.Richard_Nabavi said:
Your trumpet is well blown!AndyJS said:Don't want to blow my own trumpet but I won the prediction competition on the VoteUK discussion forum for forecasting the result of the Brecon & Radnor by-election. There were about 20 entries altogether. My prediction was LD 45, Con 37, BRX 11, Lab 5.5, Others 1.5.
0 -
I agree re exploitation and abuse. However I do find this tends to be poorly done by both Socialist and Conservatives. Take the controls over energy prices by the Tories. To me that is socialism and not free markets. There is usually a very clear difference between fair competition and rip offs (and it did happen here). I think we can all identify rip offs that are aimed at exploiting the vulnerable. I do not believe is beyond the wit of parliament to be able legislate for that in general rather than specifically. Currently rip offs continue for years, a law/rule is eventually implemented to control that and in the process stifle fair competition and the rip off merchants move to the next scam/loop hole and we have more legislation on the books.OldKingCole said:
Fine. Like you I like free markets, a lack of government intervention and a small state.Tabman said:
I agree 100%kjh said:
I ....... libertarian.Richard_Tyndall said:
Ws.RochdalePioneers said:Its
A long time ago I copied this from this site because I thought it spelt out what being a liberal was to me. Sorry I can't credit who wrote it as I can't remember.
a)- Individual freedom (free from government interference)
b)- Free markets (free from government intervention)
c)- Free trade (between all countries not just within the EU) and against protectionism
d)- Free education (up to age 18)
e)- Free health treatment (at the point of delivery)
f)- Welfare for those unable to look after themselves
g)- Health and welfare paid for by a contributory system which qualifies you (a la Beveridge)
h)- A small state so as to let people run their own lives
Liberalism is this, and the antithesis of socialism
But, what about the need to prevent exploitation. You cannot educate people to avoid them being exploited or abused. And that means state interference.
I came to the old Liberal Party because I didn't like the way the Labour Party was (then) controlled by the block vote of the trade unions. I stayed with the LibDems at least partly out of habit and because I found people like Charlie Kennedy worth following. ' Blairite social democracy I find appealing, although Iraq 'did it' for me.0 -
reunification of what ?OldKingCole said:
I strongly suspect that if there was a referendum on the unification with the electorate of UK (inc NI) and the RoI able to vote, reunification would win by a considerable distance.JBriskinindyref2 said:
Wow damning quote (from presumably the now obsolete GFA)williamglenn said:
This is the policy of the British government, which precludes a GB vote from determining the relationship between NI and Ireland:JBriskinindyref2 said:
I assume your quoting NI figures. It was a UK wide ref with a million majority for leavewilliamglenn said:
Nope.JBriskinindyref2 said:
The 2016 EU referendumwilliamglenn said:
Where is the democratic mandate in Northern Ireland to impose this additional border friction?RobD said:
I don’t think anyone is arguing cooperation will end, just an additional bit of paperwork when sending goods.rottenborough said:
Customs border not mentioned, but it was and is implicitly in the whole atmosphere that finally delivered peace.RobD said:
Can anyone point to the part of the GFA that forbids customs checks, either absolutely or at the border?rottenborough said:
Leave: 349,442 (44.2%)
Remain: 470,707 (55.8%)
"The British Government agree that it is for the people of the island of Ireland alone, by agreement between the two parts respectively, to exercise their right of self-determination on the basis of consent, freely and concurrently given, North and South, to bring about a united Ireland, if that is their wish. They reaffirm as a binding obligation that they will, for their part, introduce the necessary legislation to give effect to this, or equally to any measure of agreement on future relationships in Ireland which the people living in Ireland may themselves freely so determine without external impediment."
The people of Northern Ireland did not give consent to be taken out of the single market and customs union. Any form of Brexit that seeks to impose this on them is unacceptable and shames the UK.
I guess we're remaining then.
And the theory that it is impossible to leave the EU remains intact.0 -
Will they though? The practicalities make it very unlikely don't they?Richard_Nabavi said:
Well, one can quibble about definitions, but nationalisation without proper compensation goes a long way down the route to Marxism.TOPPING said:Maybe but I can't see a Labour government implementing Marxist policies.
0 -
Excellent piece, Joff. Thank you.0
-
One of the problems with labelling someone a Marxist is: what do you mean by it?Richard_Nabavi said:
Hmm, let's see what the Shadow Chancellor himself says. From the Repository of All Human Knowledge:TOPPING said:Good post.
They are still dangerous loons but I accept not Marxist.
In 2006, McDonnell said that "Marx, Lenin and Trotsky" were his "most significant" intellectual influences. Footage emerged of McDonnell in 2013 talking about the 2008 global financial crisis and stating, "I've been waiting for this for a generation! We’ve got to demand systemic change. Look, I’m straight, I’m honest with people: I’m a Marxist." He was accused of celebrating the global financial crisis, McDonnell denied the allegation and claimed he was "joking".
During an interview with Andrew Marr when the footage was played and McDonnell was asked, "Are you a Marxist?", he replied: "I believe there's a lot to learn from reading Kapital, yes of course there is, and that's been recommended not just by me but many others, mainstream economists as well". In 2018, McDonnell attended the Marx 200 conference and stated that "Marxism is about the freedom of spirit, the development of life chances, the enhancement of democracy"
Looks pretty damned much like a Marxist to me. @Zephyr has been misled by the fact that McDonnell knows he has to get elected first, which is why the policies officially espoused so far are merely extreme left-wing rather than all-out Marxist.
Given what I understand by Marxism I would pretty much call myself a Marxist, but I'm aware that other people think it means different things, so mostly I don't.
Once you get to the point where someone is telling you what you think, because you have no agreed definition for a label, then that label isn't useful.0 -
0
-
Dunno. We are possibly talking about an extreme left-wing government taking over after Boris has had a first go at trashing the economy. I wouldn't want us to have to rely on mere practical difficulties to prevent McDonnell finishing off the job.TOPPING said:Will they though? The practicalities make it very unlikely don't they?
0 -
The reunification of the island of Ireland.JBriskinindyref2 said:
reunification of what ?OldKingCole said:
I strongly suspect that if there was a referendum on the unification with the electorate of UK (inc NI) and the RoI able to vote, reunification would win by a considerable distance.JBriskinindyref2 said:
Wow damning quote (from presumably the now obsolete GFA)williamglenn said:
"The British Government agree that it is for the people of the island of Ireland alone, by agreement between the two parts respectively, to exercise their right of self-determination on the basis of consent, freely and concurrently given, North and South, to bring about a united Ireland, if that is their wish. They reaffirm as a binding obligation that they will, for their part, introduce the necessary legislation to give effect to this, or equally to any measure of agreement on future relationships in Ireland which the people living in Ireland may themselves freely so determine without external impediment."JBriskinindyref2 said:
I assume your quoting NI figures. It was a UK wide ref with a million majority for leavewilliamglenn said:
Nope.JBriskinindyref2 said:
The 2016 EU referendumwilliamglenn said:
Where is the democratic mandate in Northern Ireland to impose this additional border friction?RobD said:
I don’t think anyone is arguing cooperation will end, just an additional bit of paperwork when sending goods.rottenborough said:
Customs border not mentioned, but it was and is implicitly in the whole atmosphere that finally delivered peace.RobD said:
Can anyone point to the part of the GFA that forbids customs checks, either absolutely or at the border?rottenborough said:
Leave: 349,442 (44.2%)
Remain: 470,707 (55.8%)
The people of Northern Ireland did not give consent to be taken out of the single market and customs union. Any form of Brexit that seeks to impose this on them is unacceptable and shames the UK.
I guess we're remaining then.
And the theory that it is impossible to leave the EU remains intact.0 -
I clearly stated my exceptions to free markets and pointed out I was not a libertarian so how is that muddled thinking?Benpointer said:
Muddled thinking:kjh said:
I might not be representative of LDs and I'm probably more of an Orange Booker, but I don't believe LDs can encompass socialists. I have a lot in common with Social Democrats although I come to my views from a different direction to them. I believe in free enterprise and non interference from Govt in most things. I find both Labour and the Conservatives far to interfering and authoritarian. I often feel that much Tory interference appears very socialist to me. At least Labour actually believe in that interference. However I do also believe everyone has an equal right to health, education and protection from discrimination and in that I am different to a libertarian.Richard_Tyndall said:
Whilst obviously I disagree with your political viewpoint, setting that aside and looking seriously at your situation and that of probably tens of thousands of other Labour members, why do the Lib Dems not meet your standards for achieving your political aims? I have long regarded them as being at least as left wing as Labour and I would have thought they could certainly replace Labour as the main party of the left were Corbyn to persist in his refusal to listen to his members. I am surprised we have not seem much larger wholesale defections to the Lib Dems.RochdalePioneers said:
I absolutely define myself by Clause 4 of the Party Constitution. Namely:
.............
The problem is that the Labour Party is increasingly none of those things.
A long time ago I copied this from this site because I thought it spelt out what being a liberal was to me. Sorry I can't credit who wrote it as I can't remember.
a)- Individual freedom (free from government interference)
b)- Free markets (free from government intervention)
c)- Free trade (between all countries not just within the EU) and against protectionism
d)- Free education (up to age 18)
e)- Free health treatment (at the point of delivery)
f)- Welfare for those unable to look after themselves
g)- Health and welfare paid for by a contributory system which qualifies you (a la Beveridge)
h)- A small state so as to let people run their own lives
g) contradicts e) and f)
b) contradicts d) and e) - you can't have truly free markets if the state is the mian provider.0 -
4 wickets down at Edgbaston.0
-
Are the Aussies using sandpaper again?0
-
Agreed, but he labelled himself a Marxist. Seems perverse not to accept his own definition.OblitusSumMe said:One of the problems with labelling someone a Marxist is: what do you mean by it?
Given what I understand by Marxism I would pretty much call myself a Marxist, but I'm aware that other people think it means different things, so mostly I don't.
Once you get to the point where someone is telling you what you think, because you have no agreed definition for a label, then that label isn't useful.0 -
Okay - it would hardly be a democratic vote though would it. NI wants to be British and I think we should let them be that.OldKingCole said:
The reunification of the island of Ireland.JBriskinindyref2 said:
reunification of what ?OldKingCole said:
I strongly suspect that if there was a referendum on the unification with the electorate of UK (inc NI) and the RoI able to vote, reunification would win by a considerable distance.JBriskinindyref2 said:
Wow damning quote (from presumably the now obsolete GFA)williamglenn said:
"The British Government agree that it is for the people of the island of Ireland alone, by agreement between the two parts respectively, to exercise their right of self-determination on the basis of consent, freely and concurrently given, North and South, to bring about a united Ireland, if that is their wish. They reaffirm as a binding obligation that they will, for their part, introduce the necessary legislation to give effect to this, or equally to any measure of agreement on future relationships in Ireland which the people living in Ireland may themselves freely so determine without external impediment."JBriskinindyref2 said:
I assume your quoting NI figures. It was a UK wide ref with a million majority for leavewilliamglenn said:
Nope.JBriskinindyref2 said:
The 2016 EU referendumwilliamglenn said:
Where is the democratic mandate in Northern Ireland to impose this additional border friction?RobD said:
I don’t think anyone is arguing cooperation will end, just an additional bit of paperwork when sending goods.rottenborough said:
Customs border not mentioned, but it was and is implicitly in the whole atmosphere that finally delivered peace.RobD said:
Can anyone point to the part of the GFA that forbids customs checks, either absolutely or at the border?rottenborough said:
Leave: 349,442 (44.2%)
Remain: 470,707 (55.8%)
The people of Northern Ireland did not give consent to be taken out of the single market and customs union. Any form of Brexit that seeks to impose this on them is unacceptable and shames the UK.
I guess we're remaining then.
And the theory that it is impossible to leave the EU remains intact.0 -
No. It doesn't say anything about politics without a comma after honeymoon.TheScreamingEagles said:So should I use this on Sunday?
https://twitter.com/TSEofPB/status/11562938897514332160 -
Cheers BigG as I have said before one of us is in the wrong party. I hope it isn't me.Big_G_NorthWales said:
And that is a manifesto I would subscribe tokjh said:
I might not be representative of LDs and I'm probably more of an Orange Booker, but I don't believe LDs can encompass socialists. I have a lot in common with Social Democrats although I come to my views from a different direction to them. I believe in free enterprise and non interference from Govt in most things. I find both Labour and the Conservatives far to interfering and authoritarian. I often feel that much Tory interference appears very socialist to me. At least Labour actually believe in that interference. However I do also believe everyone has an equal right to health, education and protection from discrimination and in that I am different to a libertarian.Richard_Tyndall said:
Whilst obviously I disagree with your political viewpoint, setting that aside and looking seriously at your situation and that of probably tens of thousands of other Labour members, why do the Lib Dems not meet your standards for achieving your political aims? I have long regarded them as being at least as left wing as Labour and I would have thought they could certainly replace Labour as the main party of the left were Corbyn to persist in his refusal to listen to his members. I am surprised we have not seem much larger wholesale defections to the Lib Dems.RochdalePioneers said:Its a great piece Joff, and sadly leaves me asking the same daily question:
1) Why am I still in the Labour Party as what's the point, and
2) If I left, what is the alternative?
I absolutely define myself by Clause 4 of the Party Constitution. Namely:
...................
The problem is that the Labour Party is increasingly none of those things.
A long time ago I copied this from this site because I thought it spelt out what being a liberal was to me. Sorry I can't credit who wrote it as I can't remember.
a)- Individual freedom (free from government interference)
b)- Free markets (free from government intervention)
c)- Free trade (between all countries not just within the EU) and against protectionism
d)- Free education (up to age 18)
e)- Free health treatment (at the point of delivery)
f)- Welfare for those unable to look after themselves
g)- Health and welfare paid for by a contributory system which qualifies you (a la Beveridge)
h)- A small state so as to let people run their own lives0 -
It is of course a good point. Oh Jeremy Corbyn. But not in that way.Richard_Nabavi said:
Dunno. We are possibly talking about an extreme left-wing government taking over after Boris has had a first go at trashing the economy. I wouldn't want us to have to rely on mere practical difficulties to prevent McDonnell finishing off the job.TOPPING said:Will they though? The practicalities make it very unlikely don't they?
0 -
To be fair, throughout history there have been many, many customs unions.Philip_Thompson said:
I've yet to hear one reason why the Irish can have a border they desire for Corporation Tax, a border they desire for VAT, a border they desire for Income Tax, a border they desire for Abortion, but a border for customs duties is beyond the pale?Richard_Tyndall said:
So like I said no mention of borders at all then.williamglenn said:
It says it should take the form of cooperation as members of the EU.Richard_Tyndall said:
No they can't because the existence of a border, hard or soft, is not mentioned once in the whole GFA. The only mention of the border is with regard to cross-border institutions. As such the GFA explicitly recognises that a border exists but has nothing at all to say about what form it should or should not take. Powell is another fuckwit using the threat of a return to the Troubles as blackmail to argue against Brexit.RobD said:
Can anyone point to the part of the GFA that forbids customs checks, either absolutely or at the border?rottenborough said:
"Wishing to develop still further the unique relationship between their peoples and the close co-operation between their countries as friendly neighbours and as partners in the European Union"
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/136652/agreement.pdf
And if it is the case that that sentence means we are unable to leave the EU ever because membership of the EU is defined within the GFA then Lilico is right and the GFA is dead.
The border already exists. The Irish are against harmonising taxes.
But there aren't many (if any) examples of neighbouring nations harmonising corporate tax. (Not least because who decides when it changes? Are we allowing Ireland to set ours? Or are they setting ours? Or are we setting up a joint body?)0 -
They've whinged and whinged and whinged, got the ball changed - England's scoring rate has dropped and the wicket count gone up since then..TheScreamingEagles said:Are the Aussies using sandpaper again?
-1 -
Boycott says they've been given a newer ball after convincing the umpires to replace the one they started with.TheScreamingEagles said:Are the Aussies using sandpaper again?
-1 -
Point taken. Agree that protection is done poorly. Trouble is the robbers will always be one step ahead of the police.kjh said:
I agree re exploitation and abuse. However I do find this tends to be poorly done by both Socialist and Conservatives. Take the controls over energy prices by the Tories. To me that is socialism and not free markets. There is usually a very clear difference between fair competition and rip offs (and it did happen here). I think we can all identify rip offs that are aimed at exploiting the vulnerable. I do not believe is beyond the wit of parliament to be able legislate for that in general rather than specifically. Currently rip offs continue for years, a law/rule is eventually implemented to control that and in the process stifle fair competition and the rip off merchants move to the next scam/loop hole and we have more legislation on the books.OldKingCole said:
Fine. Like you I like free markets, a lack of government intervention and a small state.Tabman said:
I agree 100%kjh said:
I ....... libertarian.Richard_Tyndall said:
Ws.RochdalePioneers said:Its
A long time ago I copied this from this site because I thought it spelt out what being a liberal was to me. Sorry I can't credit who wrote it as I can't remember.
a)- Individual freedom (free from government interference)
b)- Free markets (free from government intervention)
c)- Free trade (between all countries not just within the EU) and against protectionism
d)- Free education (up to age 18)
e)- Free health treatment (at the point of delivery)
f)- Welfare for those unable to look after themselves
g)- Health and welfare paid for by a contributory system which qualifies you (a la Beveridge)
h)- A small state so as to let people run their own lives
Liberalism is this, and the antithesis of socialism
But, what about the need to prevent exploitation. You cannot educate people to avoid them being exploited or abused. And that means state interference.
I came to the old Liberal Party because I didn't like the way the Labour Party was (then) controlled by the block vote of the trade unions. I stayed with the LibDems at least partly out of habit and because I found people like Charlie Kennedy worth following. ' Blairite social democracy I find appealing, although Iraq 'did it' for me.0 -
Maybe ,however to me getting rid of the house of lords, replacing with an elected second chamber.PR for elected MPs and councils.Elected Head of state, would be radical.Richard_Nabavi said:
Well, one can quibble about definitions, but nationalisation without proper compensation goes a long way down the route to Marxism.TOPPING said:Maybe but I can't see a Labour government implementing Marxist policies.
A manifesto which said nationalise the railways , when the franchise expires is a bit tame.0 -
BJ on honeymoon? Not in WalesMarqueeMark said:
No. It doesn't say anything about politics without a comma after honeymoon.TheScreamingEagles said:So should I use this on Sunday?
https://twitter.com/TSEofPB/status/11562938897514332160 -
The Australians are a hard team to like.-1
-
I thought life was one long honeymoon for him. When he was finished with the one with one partner, he moved on to another!Tissue_Price said:
BJ on honeymoon? Not in WalesMarqueeMark said:
No. It doesn't say anything about politics without a comma after honeymoon.TheScreamingEagles said:So should I use this on Sunday?
https://twitter.com/TSEofPB/status/11562938897514332160 -
One of the current proposals is to go back to the bad old days when all Council services were supplied in-house, and actually making it illegal for local councils to seek best value. By any measure that is extreme as well as bonkers; I'm not sure it's 'radical' as such, given that it is throwing away four decades of progress which has been imitated throughout the world. It's more like discredited old-style stuff from the 'sick man of Europe' sixties.Yorkcity said:
Maybe ,however to me getting rid of the house of lords, replacing with an elected second chamber.PR for elected MPs and councils.Elected Head of state, would be radical.Richard_Nabavi said:
Well, one can quibble about definitions, but nationalisation without proper compensation goes a long way down the route to Marxism.TOPPING said:Maybe but I can't see a Labour government implementing Marxist policies.
A manifesto which said nationalise the railways , when the franchise expires is a bit tame.1
