British Politics



  • Unfortunately those ideas seem to be always loony and his principle seem to be a mad insistence on turning the Uk into a large scale version of Greece. What I don't understand is if you are a loony leftard who is as out of touch with economic reality as his supporters are why destroy the Labour party? They already have a home in the Uk Greens, why not fuck off there instead of ignoring the fact that in the past 40 years or so the only time Labour has got into power is by accepting that the electorate prefers the middle ground.

    Thats the thing, why should they? Old school labour - traditional labour is exactly what Corbyn is pushing. So there is a very strong feeling in the party that the party the signed up to is not the onme they have & that Corbyn will take it back to where it was. 
     
    They don't want Labour to be the Greens, they want Labour to be what Labour was for 99% of its time. The fact that that labour in unelectable is beside the point. The group you are calling the looney left are in fact core Labour party - and the majority of Labour party members. He's simply preaching traditional Labour.
     
    Blairs genius was to be centrist & pretend to the core of his party that Labour values still mattered. They were so excited at getting rid of the Torys they never checked to see what they now stood for

    The high polling of the SNP before the election would have scared some potential Labour voters in England.

    Very much so. That was a great campaign, it basically said "if you vote Labour or Lib Dem in England we get ruled by that mental scots bitch."
     
    And it worked a treat. Doubly so by Milliband not being trusted not to hand power to her to get in. He was seen as such a spineless fucker that the electorate thought "he will never stand up to her"



  • Thats the thing, why should they? Old school labour - traditional labour is exactly what Corbyn is pushing. So there is a very strong feeling in the party that the party the signed up to is not the onme they have & that Corbyn will take it back to where it was.
    They don't want Labour to be the Greens, they want Labour to be what Labour was for 99% of its time. The fact that that labour in unelectable is beside the point. The group you are calling the looney left are in fact core Labour party - and the majority of Labour party members. He's simply preaching traditional Labour.
    Blairs genius was to be centrist & pretend to the core of his party that Labour values still mattered. They were so excited at getting rid of the Torys they never checked to see what they now stood for
    Very much so. That was a great campaign, it basically said "if you vote Labour or Lib Dem in England we get ruled by that mental scots bitch."
    And it worked a treat. Doubly so by Milliband not being trusted not to hand power to her to get in. He was seen as such a spineless fucker that the electorate thought "he will never stand up to her"

    I'd argue traditional labour was all about getting a fair deal for working people and the welfare state not originally a party for beardos, feminists , the lbgt community , and all the other groups that have joined and turned it into the factionalised joke it is now . The British Labour Party has the luxury of fpp which means they can afford to tell them to fuck off to the greens if they don't want to move to the middle . The greens are fairly irrelevant there so those that did go would be effectively wasting their vote and labour would look like a safer pair of hands .
    I hope he wins , it'd be interesting to see what happens. Has Russell Brand endorsed him yet?



  • True but my point stands. Labour did not get wiped out by the Conservatives. Most Conservative gains were at the expense of the Lib Dems who lost nearly 50 seats. Labour got trashed in Scotland. Yeah the Tories got enough to govern alone (just) but Scotland is where Labour are bleeding.

    But Labour didn't "lose" the election. They started from behind and dropped even further back,  because their previous successes in Scotland had made Scotland all but irrelevant to the Tories. Labour spent the last four elections building a firebreak for the Tories, so when the SNP's time came all there was left to burn north of the border was Labour seats.
     
    To put it another way, thanks to Labour the Tories learnt how to govern without Scottish seats, after which all they had to do was marginalise the Lib Dems and take their seats. It makes absolutely no difference to Cameron whether the Scottish seats are held by Labour or the SNP, for him it was a zero sum game. Although I'm sure he'd love some Scottish seats, the Labour vs SNP thing was effectively a sideshow
     
    There's a lesson there for the Nats I think: decimating your opponents is fine, but destroy them and you lose control over who your next opponent is.



  • I'd argue traditional labour was all about getting a fair deal for working people and the welfare state not originally a party for beardos, feminists , the lbgt community , and all the other groups that have joined and turned it into the factionalised joke it is now . The British Labour Party has the luxury of fpp which means they can afford to tell them to fuck off to the greens if they don't want to move to the middle . The greens are fairly irrelevant there so those that did go would be effectively wasting their vote and labour would look like a safer pair of hands .
    I hope he wins , it'd be interesting to see what happens. Has Russell Brand endorsed him yet?

    See the thing is (and this is a generalisation) if you give these people something, they just come back for more. If you give the unions a 5% pay rise, then they will expect that every year and just start striking if they don't get it. The traditional labour parties of the 1930's were highly successful political forces and they basically achieved all of their goals. It was Clement Atlee who set up the NHS. In New Zealand, what goals did Savage and Fraser have that weren't realised? How many of their policies were reversed when Holland got elected? The problem with Labour is that unionism just isn't a powerful movement and people don't believe in the class struggle. I don't think it is always their policies which are the problem but rather the way their policies are framed.



  • See the thing is (and this is a generalisation) if you give these people something, they just come back for more. If you give the unions a 5% pay rise, then they will expect that every year and just start striking if they don't get it. The traditional labour parties of the 1930's were highly successful political forces and they basically achieved all of their goals. It was Clement Atlee who set up the NHS. In New Zealand, what goals did Savage and Fraser have that weren't realised? How many of their policies were reversed when Holland got elected? The problem with Labour is that unionism just isn't a powerful movement and people don't believe in the class struggle. I don't think it is always their policies which are the problem but rather the way their policies are framed.

    I think Hollands focus was on showing the unions their place, Fraser was very tight with Fintan Walsh who probably had more sway than any other union boss has had in NZ . I get your point though, they got pretty much everything they wanted and they kept looking for reasons to be relevant opening the doors for beardos like Corbyn . I'd imagine Fraser wouldn't have a lot of time for people like Cunliffe or have much in common with the party today.



  • Biggest thing with poltics is you need to address the issues of the day, a lot of left wing groups were set up to protect workers, or the environment, or consumers, at a time when laws were not in place to do so. But once those areas are addressed you need to refocus. The lefties rerally seem to struggle to do that. They rail against the erosion of unions when in the UK unions mostly means the RMT (tube workers earning 50k a year & getting 40 days holiday). Thats not a fight anyone gives a shit about. 
     
    Its like they have a reason for coming into existance - protecting the lower & middle classes, and they are still fighting for that, even in areas its not needed. Trying to ensure the umemployed had a house was maybe an OK policy when the employed could afford a house, but when the employed middle class can't afford a house bitching that people disabled by their fat have to give up their spare room in their free house is not a vote winner...
     
    Sam,e with unions, defending unions when half the country in in a union is great, defending the unions when the only experience the country has of unions is when they shut down london & cost you a days work, again, not a winner



  • Biggest thing with poltics is you need to address the issues of the day, a lot of left wing groups were set up to protect workers, or the environment, or consumers, at a time when laws were not in place to do so. But once those areas are addressed you need to refocus. The lefties rerally seem to struggle to do that. They rail against the erosion of unions when in the UK unions mostly means the RMT (tube workers earning 50k a year & getting 40 days holiday). Thats not a fight anyone gives a shit about. 
     
    Its like they have a reason for coming into existance - protecting the lower & middle classes, and they are still fighting for that, even in areas its not needed. Trying to ensure the umemployed had a house was maybe an OK policy when the employed could afford a house, but when the employed middle class can't afford a house bitching that people disabled by their fat have to give up their spare room in their free house is not a vote winner...
     
    Sam,e with unions, defending unions when half the country in in a union is great, defending the unions when the only experience the country has of unions is when they shut down london & cost you a days work, again, not a winner

    this might be the smartest thing you have ever posted on here (and of, course, by that, i mean, it's smart because i agree with it...)
     
    Unions fucking shit me, and i am as anti-union as it is possible to get. But, they most definitely had their place, and some of the things they fought for were very worthwhile, and just taken for granted by workers now. However, all that shit is now enshrined in legislation, and there are all manner of government bodies (especially here in Australia) willing to stomp all over you if they get a hint you are not keeping up your end of the bargain. 
     
    These days? All they seem to be good for is attempting to bully companies into payrises they can't afford, driving companies offshore, and then whinging it was the company's fault. They'll claim victory if they get everyone a 4% payrise (double CPI), and then bag the company when it goes under 6 months later, drowned by the cost of its labour. And there are so many of them, and none of them can agree what the want. Remember the health debacle here in Aus a couple of years ago? I remember a spokesman for the Health minister coming out and saying half the problem was they were dealing with so many unions, and none of them could agree on what they wanted. 
     
    In short, fuck the unions, it's not 1983 any more.



  • I'm not a union person either but I reckon they still have their place. It's no longer the big issues though, of workers' rights, fair pay and decent working practices. As M4L says, these are already victories of long ago and looked after by legislation. The unions now need to re-consider their role, yes there can be collective bargaining but more and more they will find themselves fighting individual causes, not fighting on behalf of the whole workforce but of the one guy that is getting shafted by his overly promoted fuckwit of a boss that is being backed by the company. On his own that guy has little chance, with the union he's got options. The problem is that the people at the top in the unions (cue sweeping generalisation) can't face the fact that they are now basically an HR resource for the workers and probably not worth the six figure salary, union funded Jaguar and expenses.
     
    I see this as the dinosaur factor. Certain political factions gain traction due to a narrow but important viewpoint, but what do they do once they gain that narrow victory? Ride off into the sunset with all the cheers ringing in their ears? Of course not, they try and find some other reason to be relevant. Imagine if in the UK that UKIP got what they wanted and we were out of Europe, that's their job done now so fuck off Nige, go back to your job as a broker. Doubt he'll want to do that, let alone all the closet racists in the party who have their own slightly more unpleasant agenda.



  • Just saw an interview with Corbyn, I can't say I see him ever being pm. They also interviewed the other candidates over why they haven't challenged him over his bizarre ideas like re nationalising some businesses and they responded in glib soundbites completely ignoring the question or even really mentioning him at all. Its not overly surprising that some people are supporting him because he has at least some sort of vision for the UK and doesn't seemed to be prompted and preened for public consumption in the background by his own version of Alistair Campbell. For years I've been banging on about Labour here being only represented by career politicians who go from student unions at varsity to a union job or working for an mp to then being an mp without ever actually having any contact with the outside world and I guess the same thing has happened in the Uk which is how you ended up with a hateful beardo being more popular than three soulless career politicians.
     
    Being on the extreme left Corbyns a big fan of Hamas and is close  mates with a muslim hate preacher who thinks that Israel was behind 9/11 http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3191679/Jeremy-Corbyn-caught-video-calling-Muslim-hate-preacher-honoured-citizen-inviting-tea-terrace-House-Commons.html  
     
    This reminds me of the election here last year, leftards banging away in their online echo chambers and thinking because they are getting likes and retweets that the rest of the world agrees with their ideas. ...until election night when the complete opposite of what they expected happened.You can pick Corbyn but he's so far out of step with the way the vast majority of people think he's got about the same chance of being pm that a one legged cat does of burying its turd in a frozen pond.



  • [b][url=http://www.spectator.co.uk/life/long-life/9606652/jeremy-corbyns-debt-to-silvio-berlusconi/]Jeremy Corbyn’s debt to Silvio Berlusconi[/url][/b]
    By Alexander Chancellor
    August 15th, 2015
    I’m going off Jeremy Corbyn. He seems more and more pleased with himself by the minute. But I understand why he is so popular with Labour supporters. It isn’t just his perceived authenticity in a field of machine politicians — the same attribute that has thrust Donald Trump to the fore in the race for the Republican nomination in the United States. It is something of which I have been reminded this week by the news that Silvio Berlusconi is planning to sell his preposterous Sardinian villa to a Saudi prince, and this is the shame felt by so many party members over their long servility to Tony Blair. For perhaps nothing better exemplifies Blair’s indifference to Labour sensibilities than his visit with Cherie to the Villa Certosa in 2004.
    Despite the monastic implications of its name, the Villa Certosa is — to quote a headline from the Times — ‘the ultimate in property porn’. It is a sprawling estate on Sardinia’s Emerald Coast, with 168 acres of garden, six swimming pools, an amphitheatre, an artificial volcano, and direct access by tunnel to the sea. But despite the kind of security that would appeal to the Saudi royal family, this didn’t prevent one enterprising paparazzo from taking photos of a large number of scantily clad girls at one of Berlusconi’s ‘bunga bunga’ entertainments. The pictures included a remarkable one of a former Czech prime minister, Mirek Topolánek, completely naked and in a state of sexual arousal.
    Berlusconi, Italy’s longest-serving prime minister since Mussolini, was choosy about who he invited to the Villa Certosa (unless, that is, they were teenage models). Among foreign leaders, he would invite only those he regarded as his personal ‘friends’, such as George W. Bush and Vladimir Putin. But not even these giants on the world stage were fêted quite as lavishly as his really close ‘friend’, Tony Blair. The war in Iraq was at its height. Thousands were dying there. But this didn’t inhibit the gaiety of the celebrations during the Blairs’ 24-hour visit.
    Four years later Cherie Blair still recalled it with rapture. ‘I have never had an evening like the one I had in Sardinia,’ she said in an interview with an Italian magazine. ‘Fireworks lit up the words “Viva Tony”, and we all sang “Summertime” together.’ Many in the Labour party had recoiled in horror at the sight of their leader cavorting shamelessly in public with a right-wing billionaire mired in financial and sexual scandal. Could it have been some diplomatic imperative that had driven him to accept this unwelcome invitation? Alas, no. In the same interview Cherie spoke with pride about the ‘friendship and trust’ that existed between Berlusconi and her husband.
    The two prime ministers had, of course, one or two things in common. They were united in subservience to President Bush and alone among the leaders of major European countries (apart from the little Spanish prime minister José María Aznar, who left office soon after it started) in their unswerving support for the 2003 invasion of Iraq. This colossal misjudgment, deeply unpopular in the Labour party at the time, has haunted Tony Blair ever since and has now been cited by Jeremy Corbyn as a possible pretext for trying him as a war criminal. Yet I feel that Blair’s taste for the high life, his habit of spongeing off the rich, and his addiction to glamorous foreign holidays sticks just as much in the craw of traditional Labour voters.
    Until 2001, when foot-and-mouth disease struck Britain, the Blairs used to stay regularly each summer in Tuscany with Prince Girolamo Guicciardini Strozzi, an aristocrat of the grandest and most ancient lineage. That he didn’t go back subsequently seems to have been thanks less to his own political sensitivity than to that of the Italian nobleman, who said in a newspaper interview at the time that ‘it would seem strange, as foot-and-mouth disease lays waste to the British tourism industry, for the prime minister to be seen going off with his family to Tuscany again. I wouldn’t do it. That’s for sure.’
    Since leaving office, Blair has been free to enrich and indulge himself as much as he wants, thus drifting ever further away from the party he once led. He may have given Labour 13 years in power, but at such discomfort to the party that many of its members would do anything to feel good about themselves again, even if it means languishing in opposition for a while yet. I don’t know where the Blairs are vacationing this summer, but Jeremy Corbyn isn’t having a holiday at all.
    This article first appeared in the print edition of The Spectator magazine, dated 15 August 2015



  • Wasn't there an ex-special forces dude that was a possibility for Labour? Forget the name, but he seemed like an ok candidate.Dan Jarvis. I suspect he'll be the Labour leader by the time of the 2020 general election.
    The Conservatives will need a new leader by then too. Cameron has repeatedly said he'll step aside before 2020.





  • And check out this charming individual who has drunk the Corbyn Kool aid http://www.breitbart.com/london/2015/09/02/guardian-writer-if-burned-falklands-hero-knew-anything-hed-still-have-his-face/

    Delightful.



  • Hahahahahahttp://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3231042/Jeremy-Corbyn-Steve-Brookstein-British-politics-s-just-won-phone-vote-British-public-not-going-buy-records-writes-MATT-CHORLEY.htmlhttp://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/sep/12/jeremy-corbyn-wins-labour-party-leadership-election



  • And Jeggas favourite beardo gets elected Labour leader.
    The thing is I'm not convinced he's unelectable in this day and age. If the economy goes south and the Tories do something stupid then his fleece the rich, more handouts policies could get him over the line.
    Hope Im wrong there but if Qld can vote in a functioning retard like Pallachook then anything can happen.



  • And Jeggas favourite beardo gets elected Labour leader.
    The thing is I'm not convinced he's unelectable in this day and age. If the economy goes south and the Tories do something stupid then his fleece the rich, more handouts policies could get him over the line.
    Hope Im wrong there but if Qld can vote in a functioning retard like Pallachook then anything can happen.



  • And Jeggas favourite beardo gets elected Labour leader.
    The thing is I'm not convinced he's unelectable in this day and age. If the economy goes south and the Tories do something stupid then his fleece the rich, more handouts policies could get him over the line.
    Hope Im wrong there but if Qld can vote in a functioning retard like Pallachook then anything can happen.

    Were the twitter warriors and leftard activists really chanting "Jez we can"?It would need a Greece style meltdown to see him win if he manages to last till the next election . It's quite alarming to see such a large group of people so out of touch with reality. I read somewhere that Cameron is further emasculating the unions over there and since no one in their right mind us going to donate to a party in which so many of its best mps have refused to be part of a shadow cabinet led by the beardo I'm guessing they won't have a lot of money to campaign with in 2020. I see the standard are engaging in a frothing self congratulatory circle jerk over the result and hoping it means the same thing might happen here. I hope so too hahahahahahttp://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/Jeremy_Corbyn/11859233/The-day-the-Labour-Party-died.html



  • Dear god , read the comments. Leftards keyboards around NZ must look like a plasterers radio right now. http://thestandard.org.nz/jeremy-corbyn-wins/



  • And Jeggas favourite beardo gets elected Labour leader.
    The thing is I'm not convinced he's unelectable in this day and age. If the economy goes south and the Tories do something stupid then his fleece the rich, more handouts policies could get him over the line.
    Hope Im wrong there but if Qld can vote in a functioning retard like Pallachook then anything can happen.

    Of course he's electable. I've seen a number of his speeches and he comes across very well despite the rubbish in the media.
     
    And especially compared to Miliband who came across as weird he is a million times more electable.
     
    And a lot of his policy ideas are supported by the majority of voters
     
    Dropping the idea of a balanced budget. Sensible and economically sound. Especially using QE to finance more needed housing
    Not selling off state owned assets and buying back some assets like railways and major utilities.
    Not becoming involved in pointless wars
    Having doubts about the EU
    Dropping student fees
    Scrap Britain's nuclear weapons
    etc
     
    Generally he wants to make Britain (and the world) a fairer and more caring society with opportunities for all not just the rich.
     
    But the propaganda media will lie and lie and lie about Corbyn. We can't have someone leading the UK with these dreadful views. It might start a disease that spreads to other countries.



  • Were the twitter warriors and leftard activists really chanting "Jez we can"?It would need a Greece style meltdown to see him win if he manages to last till the next election . It's quite alarming to see such a large group of people so out of touch with reality. I read somewhere that Cameron is further emasculating the unions over there and since no one in their right mind us going to donate to a party in which so many of its best mps have refused to be part of a shadow cabinet led by the beardo I'm guessing they won't have a lot of money to campaign with in 2020. I see the standard are engaging in a frothing self congratulatory circle jerk over the result and hoping it means the same thing might happen here. I hope so too hahahahahahttp://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/Jeremy_Corbyn/11859233/The-day-the-Labour-Party-died.html

    Comparing the UK to Greece is economic ignorance. Although not as bad as clowns who compare Zimbabwe or Wiemar Germany to any Govt today who does a small amount of "money printing".