That many of the reforms being introduced by Lansley and Co. were first brought about by Labour, with virtually not a peep of protest from commentators and radical activists, is more than a case of gobsmacking double standards. It implicitly calls into question the entire basis of the anger currently being directed at the NHS bill. What is it really all about? It is clearly not driven by a principled opposition to marketisation in the NHS, far less by a positive proposal for a new and better way to provide excellent healthcare to the populace, but rather by narrow politicking, by campaigners' teenage-like loathing of the Tories and their lovelorn disappointment with the Lib Dems. That's all very sad, I’m sure, but if you are currently shedding tears over the NHS bill but said diddlysquat about The New NHS in the 1990s and 2000s, then absolutely nothing you say can be taken seriously.

keith s
Today 10:49 AM
"But if you are currently shedding tears over the NHS bill but said
diddlysquat about The New NHS in the 1990s and 2000s, then absolutely
nothing you say can be taken seriously."

Stupidity on stilts.

There are several reasons: someone might have been rather young during these years to protest or have an opinion; more expert opinion tends to differ from your estimation that it is business as usual; and of course plenty of people did protest, it's just that you couldn't bother to check as it would ruin your constant narrative about how all activism is futile and we must learn to grovel to our masters.

Finally, people are allowed to change their mind.

You went from being a Marxist and supporting the proletarian revolution against capitalism to being a libertorian. That's a premier league turnaround compared with NHS protestors changing their minds.

Joke time.

Lansley: "Doctor, I can't seem to sit down, it's just so painful."

Doctor: "That's because you've got Brendan O Neill's head stuck up your rectum."

More desperate bullshit from the cretinous O'Neill, with some dog-whistle stuff about the 'Islamification' of the left.

George Galloway's victory confirms the demise of the radical Left, not its resurgence

As is so often the case these days, the ugliness of the Twitterstorm against a Daily Mail article has superseded the ugliness of the article itself.

It happens all the time. You read an article and think to yourself "That's not nice". And then you glimpse the rising up of the Twitter hordes to denounce said article as dumb, evil, demented or whatever and suddenly the article itself starts to look almost harmless in comparison. That was the case with Jan Moir's piece on the late pop singer Stephen Gately. It was a horrible column, but its horribleness paled into insignificance in comparison with the twitch-hunting of Moir, the mass reporting of her to the Press Complaints Commission, and the denouncing of her as "fascistic" and a "witch".

In fact, some of it is pure gibberish, made up of the kind of words and phrases you don't normally hear outside of Queer Studies departments at those former polytechnics that now masquerade as universities

The phrasing of that question shows how utterly mainstream so-called Queer Theory has become

Drop the '-rarian', and swap the o for a u and I think you're about there.