Jump to content

The Labour Party. All discussion here please

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)
19 minutes ago, Top Cats Hat said:

No, it was an anonymous caller on a radio station.

 

 

yeah, probably planted there by the jewish controlled illuminati.

 

Here we are in the post-truth, post-fact, 'I don't believe anything but I feel everything' world which makes rational debate meaningless.  It's all very sad.   

 

 

Anyway, back to those polls.  I would be interested to hear from some of the sensible Labour supporters (I think that applies to TCH only to be honest) what they think Labour needs to do to get back on track.   Do you think there will ever be a time when the members who voted Corbyn leader for what seemed like good reasons at the time, will now have to reflect that we are in a different political world now and a different answer might be needed?

 

Edited by bendix

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, bendix said:

Here we are in the post-truth, post-fact, 'I don't believe anything but I feel everything' world which makes rational debate meaningless.  It's all very sad.   

Quite the opposite.

 

In a post-fact world, it is more important than ever to be rigorous about who says what, and where. Anyone can ring a radio station, anyone can open a Twitter account and anyone can post on facebook. All we really know about them is that they can type in English and have access to a computer. Nothing else. If we are going to criticise a member or a supporter of a political Party (any political party or organisation) we need to know that the person being criticised is a member of that organisation. ‘Claims to be’ isn’t good enough.

 

The reasons people voted for Corbyn in 2015 have not changed. What has come to light since then though, is that on the biggest issue our country has faced since World War Two, Corbyn, due to adherence to a discredited ultra-left Bennite position on the EU, finds himself on the side of a group of extreme laissez-faire capitalists and against the interests of the working class.

 

I have said repeatedly that the election of a pro-Remain, left-wing Labour Party would cause such a boost on world markets at the prospect of an end to Brexit uncertainty, that Corbyn would have all the cash he needed (including the restoration of Sterling to pre-June 2016 levels) to carry out as much nationalisation and infrastructure investment as promised.

 

It is inevitable that the election of a left-wing Labour government was always going to cause jitters among the capitalist class (the famous ‘flight of capital’ and ‘run on the pound’). But the prospect of an end to the damage done and the damage forecast by Brexit would not only counter the ‘run on Sterling’ but would in fact boost Sterling, possibly higher than at any time. 

 

This is an absolutely once in a lifetime opportunity for a left-wing Labour government to not only be elected, but to have the liquidity to carry out all of its election promises, maybe without even having to tax the rich to do it. If Corbyn blows this opportunity (which I fear he already has), he will never be forgiven.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Top Cats Hat said:

No, it was an anonymous caller on a radio station.

 

Your horseshoe theory doesn’t get me going as it has little merit and it is a trope of political centrism which is wheeled out every time the centre ground is deserted. 😉

Is Bendix a pseudonym for Jean-Pierre Faye? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Robin-H said:

Is Bendix a pseudonym for Jean-Pierre Faye? 

Possibly, but to someone who has owned a number of Transit vans, it is the bit of the starter motor which sticks when you have a chipped tooth on the flywheel and requires a firm blow with a lump hammer to release it. 😀

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
12 minutes ago, Robin-H said:

Is Bendix a pseudonym for Jean-Pierre Faye? 

No, but i think the theory has some merit.  I get TCH's objections - he points out the differences in SOME policies.    OK, fair enough.  They propose in many instances differnt tactical solutions to problems).

 

My sense though is that it's less about policies (which are no more than proposed solutions to a worldview) and that the horseshoe theory really comes into its own when you consider how broadly aligned the respective macro worldviews of the far right and far left are. Both are essentially nationalist.  Both by into conspiracy theories about global elites, usually with some weird references to a controlled media.  Both have political bogeymen.  Both view international capitalism with suspicion.  And both - the far right and far left - are aggressively waging hate campaigns against political foes online using the same terminology and attacks.

 

(although TCH will argue that those members of the far left doing it are likely not far left because we don't know they are far left but only that they profess to be far left.  Or something like that . . . I dunno)

Edited by bendix

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, bendix said:

Both are essentially nationalist. 

I think that you will struggle to convince anyone to believe that the far-left is essentially nationalist. 

 

By far the largest element of the far-left in the UK is Trotskyist. Since the collapse of the Soviet Union, Stalinism and to some degree, Maoism have collapsed as a political force. Now if you have read your history, you will know that one of the major reasons Stalin fell out with Trotsky was that Stalin was essentially a Russian nationalist (as indeed is Putin) whereas Trotsky was a follower of the idea of ‘permanent revolution’ which among other things, argues that socialism in one country is virtually unsustainable and therefore has to be achieved internationally.

 

Any movement which uses slogans such as ‘Workers of the World Unite’ and sings an anthem called the Internationale, by definition cannot be nationalist.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Top Cats Hat said:

I think that you will struggle to convince anyone to believe that the far-left is essentially nationalist. 

 

By far the largest element of the far-left in the UK is Trotskyist. Since the collapse of the Soviet Union, Stalinism and to some degree, Maoism have collapsed as a political force. Now if you have read your history, you will know that one of the major reasons Stalin fell out with Trotsky was that Stalin was essentially a Russian nationalist (as indeed is Putin) whereas Trotsky was a follower of the idea of ‘permanent revolution’ which among other things, argues that socialism in one country is virtually unsustainable and therefore has to be achieved internationally.

 

Any movement which uses slogans such as ‘Workers of the World Unite’ and sings an anthem called the Internationale, by definition cannot be nationalist.

Putting to oneside the intersting history lesson (and ignoring the fact that trite phrases like Workers of the World Unite are lovely rallying cries but largely meaningless nonsense), let's look at Corbyn's own views on the EU and its affect on nationalism.

 

In 1993 he opposed the Maastricht Treaty because it ""takes away from national parliaments the power to set economic policy and hands it over to an unelected set of bankers who will impose the economic policies of price stability, deflation and high unemployment throughout the European Community."

 

In 2009 he wrote that the EU " has always been to create a huge free-market Europe, with ever-limiting powers for national parliaments and an increasingly powerful common foreign and security policy."

 

Pretty close to the nationalist anti-capitalist UKIP / EDL / Britain First positions, don't you think?  

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Top Cats Hat said:

Phrases like that come from the far-right and various crank white supremacist conspiraloons. I have never heard a Labour Party supporter or indeed anyone on the left of British politics used a phrase like that other than in a critique or racism and fascism.

https://jewishnews.timesofisrael.com/labour-member-suspended-jews-control-the-media-tweet/

 

Re: your point above, I've highlighted in bold - that's the usual defence for anyone on the left when they express bigoted views, and then claim they were misquoted, or misspoke etc. It's like starting a sentence with 'I am not being racist but..'

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, bendix said:

Putting to oneside the intersting history lesson (and ignoring the fact that trite phrases like Workers of the World Unite are lovely rallying cries but largely meaningless nonsense), let's look at Corbyn's own views on the EU and its affect on nationalism.

 

In 1993 he opposed the Maastricht Treaty because it ""takes away from national parliaments the power to set economic policy and hands it over to an unelected set of bankers who will impose the economic policies of price stability, deflation and high unemployment throughout the European Community."

 

In 2009 he wrote that the EU " has always been to create a huge free-market Europe, with ever-limiting powers for national parliaments and an increasingly powerful common foreign and security policy."

 

Pretty close to the nationalist anti-capitalist UKIP / EDL / Britain First positions, don't you think?  

 

 

 

Your argument is predicated on the assumption that Corbyn represents a majority view on Europe. He doesn’t.

 

While most of the left have their criticisms of the EU, the majority support our membership of it. They look in bewilderment at others on the left who claim that EU rules prevent widespread nationalisation, ignoring the fact that state owned industry and infrastructure is way more prevalent in most EU countries than here in the UK where pretty much everything, including social housing, has been sold off cheaply into private ownership.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Top Cats Hat said:

Your argument is predicated on the assumption that Corbyn represents a majority view on Europe. He doesn’t.

 

While most of the left have their criticisms of the EU, the majority support our membership of it. They look in bewilderment at others on the left who claim that EU rules prevent widespread nationalisation, ignoring the fact that state owned industry and infrastructure is way more prevalent in most EU countries than here in the UK where pretty much everything, including social housing, has been sold off cheaply into private ownership.

Does that matter? I don't think anyone is arguing that there are homogenous views of the left and right, only that some views from the fringes of either position are more similar than it might otherwise be assumed. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Robin-H said:

only that some views from the fringes of either position are more similar than it might otherwise be assumed. 

That’s true, but it’s about as relevant as pointing out that they watch the same  TV programmes or like the same flavour of milk shake. Shortly before the BNP disappeared up its own harris, it declared itself as a green organisation and would be supporting environmental issues. 

 

Does that mean that we should all stop supporting Greenpeace, Extinction Rebellion or the Green Party? Of course not, because it is irrelevant. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Top Cats Hat said:

That’s true, but it’s about as relevant as pointing out that they watch the same  TV programmes or like the same flavour of milk shake. Shortly before the BNP disappeared up its own harris, it declared itself as a green organisation and would be supporting environmental issues. 

 

Does that mean that we should all stop supporting Greenpeace, Extinction Rebellion or the Green Party? Of course not, because it is irrelevant. 

I'm not sure that I understand the point. 

 

No, because the BNP purported to be a green organisation it doesn't mean you shouldn't support the green party. I'm at a loss as to why that is a logical analogy for anything? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.