UK Politics - hookers and blow edition

[SeanF]

 

If we look at "Folkhemmet" ("the people's home" for those without google translate :P ) as a narrative or an idea that can permeate a nation, I don't think it necessarily needs to be tied to ethnic homogeneity.

Regarding your claim that society needs to be socially conservative for it to work, I am uncertain why you claim this, but genuinely intrigued as to why. Are there specific values in the stance to be opposed to progressive agendas that enables a common narrative in a way that a progressive stance cannot?

 

 

 

 

Pre- 1960s, a lot of socialist or social democratic parties tended to distinguish between "deserving" and "undeserving" poor (a distinction that was made across society generally).  In the UK, for example, council housing was intended to be for the "respectable" working class, rather than the more "feckless" elements of the poor.  So to get a council house, you had to have a job, get married, remain sober (new built estates didn't have public houses), stay out of trouble.  Fail to do these things, and you had to fall back on the private rented sector, which was generally reckoned to be inferior.  Now that Western societies tend to be more individualistic, I don't know how much support this approach would have today.

[The Marquis de Leech]

 

Pre- 1960s, a lot of socialist or social democratic parties tended to distinguish between "deserving" and "undeserving" poor (a distinction that was made across society generally).  In the UK, for example, council housing was intended to be for the "respectable" working class, rather than the more "feckless" elements of the poor.

 

Pre-1960s, of course, western social democratic parties (and a fair few conservative ones as well) believed in government-guaranteed full employment. You really can't cherry pick policies that were designed to apply to a completely different world.

[SeanF]

 

Pre-1960s, of course, western social democratic parties (and a fair few conservative ones as well) believed in government-guaranteed full employment. You really can't cherry pick policies that were designed to apply to a completely different world.

 

Yes indeed.  That's why I think it might be difficult to win support for the sort of policy programme that Lyanna Stark supports.

[Valandil]

 
Alternatively, Corbyn is adored by the ordinary members. Being too blatant about undermining him is a recipe for deselection.

It's a pickle for them alright! Still, someone will do it I expect.
As an aside, British politics has been fascinating for the last year between scottish referendum, May election and now this. Great stuff.

[Hereward]

Corbyn won less than half the vote of party members, so if an MP has a strong local following, they may not fear that threat too much.

[McCracken]

He won 49% of first preferences in a four way contest and 30 000 more have become members since he won.

[Lyanna Stark]

 

Yes indeed.  That's why I think it might be difficult to win support for the sort of policy programme that Lyanna Stark supports.

 

Oh, I wasn't thinking of a direct resurrection of what went on in the 60s, instead that the Left needs to create a narrative and to take back certain areas they've ceded to the right without a fight (so far, at least). The election of Corbyn is interesting in that regard since it seems there is an interest in another narrative than what is currently on offer from the established parties. Which btw is not any sort of commentary on his suitability or lack thereof, just that his election can be seen as a symptom of something, or a need for something that is different.

[Masonity]

 

 

Let my humble second language self have a look at your little bit of "hyperbole" and "rhetorical flourish" then and add some actual numbers to put in perspective just how "little" you added?

 

The last number quoted for the UK was that 20.000 refugees from Syria would be taken in (potentially over as much as 5 years, but never mind that).

 

If we do some simple maths, (and again, I sincerely apologise for any confusion my status as a second language speaker will add, as I know it must be offensive to you as a first language speaker to have to read my lowly, non inborn, words) then if we compare your 20 million to the actual 20.000 people, that means the real amount is 0.0001% of what you actually suggested. Now, my education may be sorely lacking due to it not having been conducted in English, but to me, comparing 20.000 with 20 million is not what constitutes a "rhetorical flourish" or "a bit of hyperbole" it's completely misleading, not applicable as either a "rhetorical flourish" or "a bit of hyperbole", in addition to being totally and utterly wrong.  You managed to overshoot the real number by 19.98 million.

 

 

While I agree with you politically, I'm afraid I have to disagree mathamatically. 20,000 is 0.1% of 20,000,000. Other than that, I agree with every word you said.

 

 

 

But on Corbyn and what I like / what excites me?

 

He hasn't run on a fear ticket. Last election the thing that drove me to the Green Party (other than that their policies sit closely to several long held beliefs of mine, including some that I didn't think anyone was pushing like the citizen's income) was that they offered a campaign of hope. Of optimism. Of "We can make things better!" 

 

Labour and the Tories both played the politics of fear. It is a politics the Conservatives thrive in, but Labour played their game. Took them on in their own court. And were crushed. 

 

Corbyn will take them on not by beating the Tories in a fear campaign. He doesn't seem the type to play "Fear five more years of them more than you fear five years of us". He's more likely to reframe the debate totally, and bring some optimism to the table. To talk about what we can do rather than what we shouldn't.

 

Like I've said before, I doubt he'll be able to change the Labour party enough to make me vote them over the Greens. They'd have to, as a party, shift radically. I'm not even sure I prefer his politics to Natalie Bennet's or the Greens as a whole. However I am looking forward to the left as a whole having a decent voice, a good campaign and a chance of winning. Hopefully a win that includes a Labour / SNP / Green loose coalition (Supply and Confidence probably?) rather than an outright win, but a left win all the same.

[McCracken]

I think it would love to see labour try and make a deal to not compete with the greens, lib dems and plaid to not run against each other.  I think if labour offer pr they could get the lib dems onside for a left coalition.

[Northernmonkey]

I think it would love to see labour try and make a deal to not compete with the greens, lib dems and plaid to not run against each other.  I think if labour offer pr they could get the lib dems onside for a left coalition.

 
I can see Labour doing that with the Greens. Labour could stand aside in 2 or 3 seats (Brighton Pavilion, Bristol West etc.) and in exchange the Greens stand aside in the rest of the country. Hypothetically that could provide an extra million votes for Labour.
 
I'd love it if Corbyn offered PR to get the Lib Dems on side but so far he's shown no interest in electoral reform.
 
Plaid want independence so I'm not sure if they'd be interested.

[The Marquis de Leech]

Plaid want independence so I'm not sure if they'd be interested.

 

Nah, Plaid's a good deal more flexible on the independence front than the SNP (largely because full independence is much less popular in Wales than Scotland). Buy them off with more money for (northern) Wales and the language, and they'd be happy.

[McCracken]

I can't find the article now but i read an interview with John McDonnell where he backed PR.

 

I have to say recent events made me really angry at the PLP.  They talked about how important it is for labour to win 2020, how'd they be letting down the people who need them if they don't.  But now Corbyn has won they are showing no sign of trying to make it work and look like would rather throw their toys out the pram than work with Corbyn.  When so much is at stake this infantile behaviour is really disgusting.

 

What do they hope to achieve by sniping in the background?  Labour can only win if united!  If they refuse to work with Corbyn the party will be ripped apart.  Many members and Corbyn supporters will feel rightly agrieved.  It will also show all on the left that they have no place in labour party, they will take your voted and money, thank you very much, but don't expect to have your voice heard.  Do expect to be marginalised and insulted.

[lessthanluke]

 
Nah, Plaid's a good deal more flexible on the independence front than the SNP (largely because full independence is much less popular in Wales than Scotland). Buy them off with more money for (northern) Wales and the language, and they'd be happy.

Pretty much this. There aren't that many people who want an independent Wales.

[Hereward]

It would be pretty rich for serial sniper in the background Jeremy Corbyn to demand loyalty to his personal policy positions when the power to decide policy lies with the party as a whole anyway. 

[mormont]

A pact with other parties only makes sense if you stand to win a significant number of seats you couldn't otherwise win. I haven't done the research, but off the top of my head I'm guessing that the Labour party might gain a handful of seats at most with a Green/Plaid pact. Considering the (successful) attacks the Tories made on Labour for being in the pocket of the SNP without there even being a pact, I'm assuming that they would do the same in the event of a Green/Plaid pact and that this would cost the Labour party many votes and some seats. So... not sure this is a brilliant strategic idea.

[McCracken]

mormont

 

I don't think the Greens or Plaid are anywhere near a toxic as the SNP.  I can't see labour losing a significant amount of voted due their potential marginal influence.

 

I also havne't done any research and you may well be right that there wouldn't be any seats in it.  It's the pact with the lib dems that i see as having the most potential anyway.  Labour need the lib dems to win back all those seats off the conservatives.  Also it surely couldnt do any harm to not be competing with the lib dem, greens and plaid in seats you need to win off the tories and could even make all the difference.

 

Hereward,  this is about far more than Corbyn.  The PLP should do it for the members who have clearly stated they want the party to change direction.  Even more importantly they should do it for the country as the UK needs a labour government.  I know you diagree with that last bit but the PLP having been hammering that point for months now.  So instead of getting into childish squabbling, (its unfair, he voted against party line first... wha wha wha) they should get on with their jobs!  Their suppossed to be a governemnt in waiting not a bunch of school children, internal conflict should be kept behind closed doors not plastered all over the papers making labour look like a joke.

 

I do relise that i'm leaving myself open to the easy, but labour/corbyn are a joke.  Hopefully the board will consider such low hanging fruit beneath them...

[The Marquis de Leech]

It would be pretty rich for serial sniper in the background Jeremy Corbyn to demand loyalty to his personal policy positions when the power to decide policy lies with the party as a whole anyway. 

 

It's even richer for the "don't let Corbyn win - he'll start a 1980s-style civil war!" crowd to, you know, start a 1980s-style civil war.

 

The Labour Left was actually quite well-behaved during the Blair era, up until the Iraq War. Clearly the Blairites aren't returning the favour (I almost wish they'd bugger off and form the SDP II, and vanish without a trace when it turns out that anyone who supports Blairite positions would be voting Tory anyway).

[A wilding]

 

The Labour Left was actually quite well-behaved during the Blair era, up until the Iraq War. Clearly the Blairites aren't returning the favour (I almost wish they'd bugger off and form the SDP II, and vanish without a trace when it turns out that anyone who supports Blairite positions would be voting Tory anyway).

 

According to rumour several Blairites are thinking of defecting to the Tories. Talk about kicking the people who voted for you in the teeth ...

[SeanF]

I'm not sure the Lib Dems would be too keen on a pact with a Corbyn-led Labour party.  But, if you did have a united Labour/Lib Dem/Green/Plaid pact, there's always the chance that the Conservatives and UKIP would negotiate an electoral pact in response. Alternatively, Conservative and UKIP voters might vote tactically for whichever party was best placed to beat the candidate of the Left coalition.  That could put Labour under pressure in a number of seats where UKIP achieved strong second places and Labour polled well under 50% in May (eg Hartlepool, Stoke Central, Heywood & Middleton, Don Valley).

 

The combined vote for Lab/Lib Dem/ Green/Plaid in England and Wales was 45%.  For Con/UKIP it was 53%.

[Gasp of Many Reeds]

I'm not sure the Lib Dems would be too keen on a pact with a Corbyn-led Labour party.  But, if you did have a united Labour/Lib Dem/Green/Plaid pact, there's always the chance that the Conservatives and UKIP would negotiate an electoral pact in response. Alternatively, Conservative and UKIP voters might vote tactically for whichever party was best placed to beat the candidate of the Left coalition.  That could put Labour under pressure in a number of seats where UKIP achieved strong second places and Labour polled well under 50% in May (eg Hartlepool, Stoke Central, Heywood & Middleton, Don Valley).

 

The combined vote for Lab/Lib Dem/ Green/Plaid in England and Wales was 45%.  For Con/UKIP it was 53%.

I think Corbyn, as a left-wing Eurosceptic, might be able to pull some supporters from UKIP, especially those who aren't keen on the avowed free-marketism of its leaders.