At the moment, I would vote SNP if I could. I hope they obliterate the other parties in the elections for the Scottish assembly in May. If this happens, then they are going to demand another referéndum re-Scottish Independence. I would hope a forward looking Labour party would endorse this as well, given that Labour look largely a redundant forcé sticking to a unionist policy.
Fully in support of the SNP. Excellent leadership in Edinburgh and Westminster. On Corbyn, the gift that keeps on giving for The Tories. An alternative scenario : 2016 Corbyn unequivocally supports Remain. The referendum returns a very narrow win for Remain. The usual suspects ERG and Farage say that this is unfinished business. The parliament staggers on as Cameron still has a working majority. Major disruption from both inside and outside the Tory party. As the time nears for the General Election Farage puts up candidates all across the country, fatally splitting the Tory vote. Corbyn's manifesto isn't universally popular but they get 30% of the vote. Brexit splits the vote in hundreds of seats and Corbyn enters No10 with a working majority. The trouble is Corbyn was too stupid to see this as a strategy.
Novern That is a good post. I have been in communication with my local Labour Party and understand that there has been a lot of discontent with Starmer's treatment of Jeremy Corbyn. It is also fair to say that this resentment has been brewing some while since the treatment meted out to Rebecca Long-Bailey. Unfortunately, the mechanisms available to Labour Party members to address the matter appear to be in the process of being removed and the treatment of those members in Bristol is demonstrative that the current regime to tolerate dissent. I appreciate the need to make Labour fit to fight the Tories yet I feel that this is precisely what is not being done by Starmer. All debate is being shut down and if there is an attempt to mirror the Tories, it is by having the same regimented system as previously marshalled by Dominic Cummings. You can understand why the rank and file members are feeling uneasy with what is happening. I partly agree with you as there is a need for the Left to make itself appear to be "decent." I never joined Momentum because it always felt to me that whilst the sentiments might have admirable, the movement had little future once Corbyn was out of the picture. The prime movers and shakers have largely left and you wonder just how long a future it will have. I am not aware of it suffering from the entryism of Militant but it is a spent force. I think you are correct about "getting the message out there" although I would probably disagree with you in that success will largely be about getting the message out there. I am a little bit sceptical about the influence of newspapers as they appear to lack the same kind of clout they had 20-30 years ago. People can get their news from other sources now and Labour needs to ensure that these channels are exploited. I grant you that the printed press does not help and even more soft-left leaning papers like The Guardian have a small readership largely limited to school teacher, BBC employees, council management, etc. The problem Labour have is more nuanced and that is getting ordinary people to once again believe that the party is acting in their interests. I feel that the route being taken by Labour towards the centre ground is indicative of the similar journey made by Tony Blair which effectively facilitated the rise of parties like SNP and Ukip where voters no longer recognise that their interests are served by Labour. The more "liberal" approach taken has ultimately been to the detriment to the party. Where I am in disagreement with you is that I feel Starmer is exactly a re-run of Blair and this style of politics is a ship that has now passed. The trick will be to get people to regain their faith in the Left not by compromising to represent a meaningless middle ground. Once the Tories ditch Boris, Starmer will face the same issues as previous Labour leaders as they will see very little to differentiate from what the Conservatives will offer. This is why Corbyn was such a breath of fresh air. I think his days are over but I also believe that he has left a legacy for someone young and vibrant who is not part of the political establishment who can fulfil Jeremy's ambitions. The number of new members and voters inspired by Corbyn is indicative that he was on the right path. I think that Starmer may possess more stature yet it is difficult not to think that the party is now going in the wrong direction.
My MP shares the characteristics you describe, and had a long history of campaigning on the same issues before he went into Parliament. He was also one of those who voted to oust Corbyn. He said he agreed with Corbyn on many policies, but that he was 'hopeless' as a leader. I do accept JC is a decent man. He is a good campaigner on issues, in my view, but was always the wrong man to lead on wider policies. I just wish the daft bugger was capable of saying he was wrong occasionally. He's put the party on the back foot when we need it least. Simple apology for the mistakes made on your watch, Jeremy. It's what leaders do.
Excellent article about just how much we will all lose when Freedom of Movement ends on 31st December: https://westcountrybylines.co.uk/en...cylfeK-QBRHNMKNzoceAOVUejivSFo4xNaLHZHRpsK5fY
I think the consensus of views relayed here recently by the Labour supporting posters is JC is a principled, and well meaning, but is inflexible and unapologetic for his views. I think that is true and it makes him a good MP in general, but he was never able to convince or bring the majority of either his MPs or the country to his way of thinking, and was too inflexible too move towards the majority view. I agree that by moving to the centre , the Labour party has allowed the growth of the SNP, and that has made winning the election as a truly socialist movement unlikely as the price of independence in Scotland will be too high in the long term for the Labour Party. The Labour party government of the future will have to work with Israel and other countries to protect and improve the rights of Palestines and that might be difficult with such outspoken characters leading.
I am hoping that millions of people, who have previously looked down their noses at socialist principles, have had a massive wake up call, during this pandemic. Especially those Tory voters who have received 80% of their wages via the furlough system, because they have benefited greatly from the state using socialist principles to pay them. If the government hadn’t turned to socialist principles, then many of them would have been well and truly ****ed. Socialism is not the devil it is painted as being, when implemented fairly.
I'm not sure that, certainly from my standpoint, the argument is about the merits of socialism but how it could be achieved. I am certain that in the last couple of weeks we have all seen those oxygen thieves across the pond insisting that Trump won and he was a bulwark against socialism. Well it's a lot milder here but we still have 40% or thereabouts of the electorate who share those views and think that Pfeffel is their bulwark. So the argument really is how we persuade a tranche of those people that they are wrong. And the problem there is while we might be watching news or politics programs they are watching Come Dancing or Mrs Brown's Boys. I've spent many years on the doorstep trying to change people's minds and I can assure you it's an uphill fight. One speech by Corbyn undoes years of yapping on doorsteps.
Many of the people who voted for this government probably did so both out of self-interest and because of the relentless disinformation spread by the Tory party that brainwashed people into believing that casting a vote for a Labour government was some kind of personal death wish. The lies and deceit were beyond anything we have ever seen in this country and that is where the election was won and lost. It was not a fair election, just like the referendum was skewed with lies, empty promises and racist undertones. Those lies and the deception would never have gained as much traction if we had a population that were politically astute and involved in the things that really matter in our communities. Unfortunately we have become a very self-centred and selfish country and as long as we have what we need to get by on, it is quite easy to not see the suffering of others and the social decay around us. Jeremy Corbyn was painted as a threat to the UK but in reality he was a threat to the neo-liberal corporate oligarchs and the financial and political elite. He was a threat to the off-shore money dumps and the tax avoiders, and he was definitely a threat to the liars and chancers who masquerade as journalists. The problem with Jeremy Corbyn is he is a very easy target, in that many of the things he stands for are simple to skew to seem like something they are not. I will always believe that a Corbyn government would have been a huge benefit to this country and we are all the poorer for the shower of **** we have ended up with.
Another good article about the EU, centring on a 92 year old French Resistance veteran who lost her brother to a slave-labour camp during World War II. She resisted visiting Germany for 74 years because of her hatred of the Nazis, but now she recognises that the EU has been responsible for peace in Europe more than any other factor. She says, in a nutshell, if borders between countries can’t stop the coronavirus moving around, then what’s the point in having them at all? The article goes on to debunk, yet again, the lies that were told to persuade people to vote for Brexit: https://www.theguardian.com/comment...75GuFqt5Ld6h9d5I6ZKQYUPrSY_FI_b89fVmV0Bc_xvNI
I always view it even simpler than that. Many of the people who voted for this government did so because that was the way the media led them. NOT ALL I stress not all as there is always a chunk of people who will analysis and vote based on their beliefs, what they read up on and understand. I do believe that the media have an affect another large chunk of people who aren’t so interested in taking the time to read up on topics, or have no set belief. This happens a lot of the time. I said at the moment the referendum was called that whoever the Mail and Sun backed would win. They did. I kid you not that a chap in my social group actually said last week on the topic of elections, “They can vote for someone just because they like his suit.” Now he is correct and they are fully entitled to do so, however that does somewhat expose the weakness of a democratic system being easily led by the media
But the question now isn’t wether JC is fit to be Labour leader; it’s wether he’s fit to represent the people of Islington North as their Labour MP. Which in my opinion he clearly is. I think Starmer is far more of a leader than Corbyn was capable of being, but I think he’s called this one wrong.
Largely agree with that. I have said before that if, as a child, your parents read a right wing paper and voice agreement with what they are reading, it is very easy for the children to become indoctrinated into believing the same things, and reading the same paper, thus keeping the wheel turning. *** Until people start looking beyond the content of a newspaper, their over all opinion on politics is likely to be influenced by the paper that they read. I can’t believe that anyone would continue to read a newspaper that has a political view and style of reporting politics that was different to their own beliefs. The Sun, IMO, is the paper that elects the PM, as it is the one that persuades the working class to vote for the party that is least likely to help them, except for when he (Murdoch) supported Blair and had Sun readers voting for Labour. *** We need to vote for Daenerys Targaryen. She’ll break the wheel.
The official position of the lawyers of the President of the United States is that the Democrats, in league with George Soros and others, rigged the election with Venezuelan money (why would they need Venezuelan money? The Democrats were awash with money) and a plan devised by Hugo Chavez, who has been dead for seven years. And also, their position is that any Republican who disputes this version of events was probably in on the rigging, too. One of the primary sources for this madness is the guy who ran 8chan, a message board best known for hosting QAnon, the manifestos of mass shooters, and child pornography. I don't know how you unring this bell. (Also, the hair dye of one of the president's lawyers was dripping down the side of his face throughout, because why not)
