[Abernathy]

Ostensibly, I think.

[Malcolm Armsteen]

The gesture is all.

[Boiler]

Hmmm. I can certainly remember some Labour-supporting individuals crossing picket lines I stood on in the 80s. Nothing new here.

[bluebellnutter]

I hesitate to use the term but I'm going to because I think it fits, how could anyone know his virtue if he didn't signal it?

[The Weeping Angel]

Could he not just have stayed at home rather than making a very public, and very futile gesture that is bound to be quoted out of context ad nauseum?

No he had to make a gesture.

[Winegums]

Could he not just have stayed at home rather than making a very public, and very futile gesture that is bound to be quoted out of context ad nauseum?

In an age when politicians are seen increasingly as out of touch and in a bubble, this is important. Hunt crossing a picket line incensed a lot of people on the left and reinforced the idea that New Labour just saw unions as money with nowhere else to go. That he didn't really see any problem with it was worse.

An MP on a picket line potentially gets more attention for the protest and more importantly shows solidarity. It might not swing it, but if the public feel the MP is on their side, they're going to vote for them, and to fight with them.

It amazes me I have to explain why Labour MPs scabbing is bad.

[visage]

The only side that John McDonnell is on is his own.

[bluebellnutter]

It's very telling that you assume the public is automatically on the side of the strikers, when overwhelmingly they normal aren't. I can't comment on these specific ones but by and large the public attitude to strikers is not favourable.

Also, "angered many on the left". That tiny minority who won't win you an election.

P.S. Tristram Hunt was not a member of the union on strike, therefore he was not a "scab".

[Winegums]

It doesn't matter if the public support the strikers, part of being a party of workers is generally supporting strikes. Obviously if the strike is complete bollocks then that's fine, but is that even a common occurrence given how far the balance has shifted to capital holding all the cards?

Sometimes you have to do what is right rather than what's popular. If you think Labour politicians shouldn't support industrial action then you're basically giving up on the labour movement. The public will see strikes as an inconvenience because they are, but the aim is to inconvenience the employer more until they cave. Entertaining the mindset of "god, why do you have to withdraw your labour? Just talk it out like adults" is fucking stupid and puts the power back in the hands of employers.

Scabs aren't members of the union usually, but generally refers to anyone who crosses a picket to do a job those picketing normally do. You can argue he was teaching a lecture none of them were giving, but at this point it's largely semantic. He was a fucking scab and should've been hounded out of the party for it.

[The Weeping Angel]

It's very telling that you assume the public is automatically on the side of the strikers, when overwhelmingly they normal aren't. I can't comment on these specific ones but by and large the public attitude to strikers is not favourable.

Also, "angered many on the left". That tiny minority who won't win you an election.

P.S. Tristram Hunt was not a member of the union on strike, therefore he was not a "scab".

I recall New Puritan getting on his high horse about it, then again it didn't take much for him to get on his high horse about most things especially when Blairites were involved.

[davidjay]

Could he not just have stayed at home rather than making a very public, and very futile gesture that is bound to be quoted out of context ad nauseum?

In an age when politicians are seen increasingly as out of touch and in a bubble, this is important. Hunt crossing a picket line incensed a lot of people on the left and reinforced the idea that New Labour just saw unions as money with nowhere else to go. That he didn't really see any problem with it was worse.

An MP on a picket line potentially gets more attention for the protest and more importantly shows solidarity. It might not swing it, but if the public feel the MP is on their side, they're going to vote for them, and to fight with them.

It amazes me I have to explain why Labour MPs scabbing is bad.

It amazes me that you have to have it explained that looking like a responsible government in waiting isn't helped by making empty gestures.

[Winegums]

Could he not just have stayed at home rather than making a very public, and very futile gesture that is bound to be quoted out of context ad nauseum?

In an age when politicians are seen increasingly as out of touch and in a bubble, this is important. Hunt crossing a picket line incensed a lot of people on the left and reinforced the idea that New Labour just saw unions as money with nowhere else to go. That he didn't really see any problem with it was worse.

An MP on a picket line potentially gets more attention for the protest and more importantly shows solidarity. It might not swing it, but if the public feel the MP is on their side, they're going to vote for them, and to fight with them.

It amazes me I have to explain why Labour MPs scabbing is bad.

It amazes me that you have to have it explained that looking like a responsible government in waiting isn't helped by making empty gestures.

Empty is your value judgement, not mine. I think it was a nice move given we've had Blairite melts scab on protests previously.

Do you think the scabbing was helpful?

[davidjay]

In an age when politicians are seen increasingly as out of touch and in a bubble, this is important. Hunt crossing a picket line incensed a lot of people on the left and reinforced the idea that New Labour just saw unions as money with nowhere else to go. That he didn't really see any problem with it was worse.

An MP on a picket line potentially gets more attention for the protest and more importantly shows solidarity. It might not swing it, but if the public feel the MP is on their side, they're going to vote for them, and to fight with them.

It amazes me I have to explain why Labour MPs scabbing is bad.

It amazes me that you have to have it explained that looking like a responsible government in waiting isn't helped by making empty gestures.

Empty is your value judgement, not mine. I think it was a nice move given we've had Blairite melts scab on protests previously.

Do you think the scabbing was helpful?

I don't think the overwhelming majority of people - real, actual voters of the sort you have to get on your side to win an election - could care less one way or the other. What isn't helpful is the slightest hint that John McDonnell is still in his Angry Young Man phase.

[bluebellnutter]

Do you think the scabbing was helpful?

It. Was. Not. Scabbing.

Do you really have to have basic terms explained to you before you start throwing them around because you think it makes your case sound better?

[crabcakes_windermere]

Winegums: He was a Labour MP, that carries with it certain expectations. "Not scabbing" is one of the most fundamental. I'd hope that he'd join a union as a fucking Labour MP, but at the very least if the cause was just (and we can assume it was if he supported it) he shouldn't cross the picket line. Jesus fucking Christ he didn't even say he supported the strike, just their right to strike. What is it with Blairites and really fucking hating the people they pretend to represent and the party the austensibly belong to? At least he's gone now...

He could've taught on the picket line, he could've got the students down. It was a fucking lecture on Marx, and he crossed a picket line to deliver it, and your justification is "but they paid for that lecture on the free market".

Maybe Hunt didn't agree with the reason for the strike, or felt that it was taken before other avenues had been exhausted? To be honest I - like most people - don't massively care. I'll happily support strikes that I feel are justified, and if someone wants to join in then that's fine, but all this 'scab' business is so very much sixth form politics bullshit and I'll never support anyone trying to bully people to join in. No one should feel compelled to join industrial action if they don't want to, or even join a union. And extrapolating a personal choice on whether to join a striking union you're not even in to a whole group of MPs 'really fucking hating the people they pretend to represent' is utterly absurd. And hypocritical, given what we know about the Labour party membership's view on Brexit (no thanks) compared to the current leadership's policy on it (yes please). Do Corbyn and McDonnell 'fucking hate the people they pretend to represent' when they steadfastly refuse to move to a position that is truly anti-Brexit - a position every single bloody survey shows is favoured by 75% and up of the labour membership, or is it OK when they fuck over the people they represent on a matter a hell of a lot more important than a minor case of industrial action by a small union?

Also, what I find interesting is your need to bring it up at all. Why, in a thread about John McDonnell, did you feel the need to get in a dig at a guy who isn't even an MP anymore and has literally done what you clearly wanted him to do and fucked off? Because by doing what you did, you've suddenly not made it about McDonnell (and just leaving it at a 'Good to see John McDonnell supporting academics in their aim to get better pay' would probably have been fine. Positively received, even.). Instead, you've made it all about image, and about being seen to be the 'right' sort of person and making sure the 'wrong' sort of person knows their alleged place and their inferiority at being a good socialist. Which actually says far more about you and what's important to you than anything else.

In an age where politicians are increasingly seen as out of touch and in a bubble, as you rightly say, what we need is MPs engaging with the public and - here's a radical thought - taking on board what the majority of their membership and the majority now of the populace would like when deciding policy. What we don't need is people obsessed about being seen to be 'right on' to the point where they'll happily gift PR opportunities for the Tories to make them look like political dinosaurs from a bygone era of bell bottoms and lukewarm panda pops. Because aside from the sort of ranting utter bell-end who sells socialist worker in the hope of bringing about a glorious revolution that is never, ever coming, that's not going to impress anyone - and if you don't impress anyone, you don't get elected and you don't get to do diddly squat. And if you don't do diddly squat then your legacy is nothing - and that's a hell of a lot less than those awful, awful Blairite MPs who did so very, very much good when in office.

I appreciate that must stick in the craw of a Corbynite like a 6-metre long toothpick, but you know what will change it? Making Labour electable. You know what won't? Playing pissy one-upmanship on who has the shiniest red star.

(edited to add in who/what I was replying to as for some reason it didn't come up)