Topics about the Labour Party
:sunglasses: 57.1 % :grinning: 28.6 % :shit: 14.3 %
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
 
By Winegums
Membership Days Posts
#535542
crabcakes_windermere wrote:
Wed Feb 28, 2018 9:45 am
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?
I'm overjoyed that you don't care about academics striking, but I care. Academics care. The Labour party should care. It's pretty un-comradely of you to actively not give a fuck about people striking for their pensions.

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.
Labour is, by design, a party that represents labour. The workers. The clue is in the name. Crossing a picket line as a member of parliament who represents organised labour is pretty galling. Ideologically Labour members should support the efforts of organised labour. Sure, not all strikes are just, but I'd suggest most probably are given the sheer effort required to undertake them and the generally reasonable nature of people. If he disagreed with them he should've very very clearly explained why. But he didn't. I'd suggest he didn't even really care.

Hunt's dad was a Labour counsillor (now peer). He went to university in America, then did a PhD at Cambridge. Worked for a few years at Labour HQ then parachuted into a safe seat by the NEC. I don't think he really gets what Labour is. I don't say this as a dig at him, I genuinely don't think he understood the problem with crossing a picket line. Like his understanding of labour and left wing politics is just theoretical.


It's not about being seen to be right or wrong, but about actually doing things that are right or wrong. Hunt wasn't some Dark Knight bearing the brunt of public hate so he could cross the picket to strike a deal and end the strike, he had precisely fuck all involvement with whole process. He's not some noble martyr, just a profoundly upper middle class person who didn't really care that colleagues were striking. As both a lecturer and a Labour MP do you not think that's odd? Do you not think he should've had a stance on this issue? He broke the picket to give a lecture. This acted to undermine the picket. This is poor solidarity.


The party is under new management, and it's an age of contrasts. Previous leaders sucked up to the mainstream media and were embarassed to be socalist. I'm a huge fan of the party of labour actually being proud of workers and standing with them, not handwringing and saying that strikes are bad. Why bring Hunt up, because it's a contrast.

McDonnell joining picket lines that Hunt would've walked past is a striking comparison.
Previous labour leaders submitting their favourite Mac comics for "30 years of Mac" whilst Corbyn says he doesn't find them funny at all is notable.
"Controls on immigration" mugs vs the party stance on immigration at present.
Being anti-nuclear weapons and against selling arms to the Saudis vs Blairing the fuck out of the middle east.
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)
Labour wasn't electable under Brown or Miliband. The neoliberal "third way" shit has died. Maybe if you had a charismatic leader you could charm another term, but Blair killed every pretender to the throne. Even before Brexit, what the fuck were you offering people? Who's getting excited for "we'll only work you 1/2 to death"? Who was taking to the streets to leaflet for "controls on immigration"?

I look at Hillary Clinton's disasterous campaign, and I look at Blue Labour, and I honestly can't tell the difference. You see the same offerings of fuck all and utter inability to see why people are angry and upset and disengaged with politics. The needle is swinging left and you're all pushing right screaming "WE'RE ELECTABLE WE'RE ELECTABLE".
 
By The Weeping Angel
Membership Days Posts
#535545
Hunt's dad was a Labour counsillor (now peer). He went to university in America, then did a PhD at Cambridge. Worked for a few years at Labour HQ then parachuted into a safe seat by the NEC. I don't think he really gets what Labour is. I don't say this as a dig at him, I genuinely don't think he understood the problem with crossing a picket line. Like his understanding of labour and left wing politics is just theoretical.
Yeah he's also an historian as well, having presented several programmes and written books about history. A couple of other points you might want to be careful about throwing the poshness label given that a number of Corbyn's inner circle and Corbyn himself went to Public School. Also may I remind you of the money Corbyn took off Iran and Russia, for appearing on their propaganda.
 
By Winegums
Membership Days Posts
#535546
Corbyn's been staunchly socialist pretty consistently. Much like Tony Benn it's not where you're born but where you go, and Hunt never really ventured far from the company he was predestined to mix with.
 
By The Weeping Angel
Membership Days Posts
#535547
Winegums wrote:
Sun Mar 04, 2018 2:14 am
Corbyn's been staunchly socialist pretty consistently. Much like Tony Benn it's not where you're born but where you go, and Hunt never really ventured far from the company he was predestined to mix with.
In Benn's case on a Messianic journey that split the party, allowed in arseholes like Militant and help keep the Conservatives in power. But hey principles.
By Andy McDandy
Membership Days Membership Days Posts
#535560
Fucks sake. You two sex gods know how to have fun on a Saturday night.
Zuriblue, Boiler, Malcolm Armsteen and 2 others liked this
 
By crabcakes_windermere
Membership Days Posts
#535840
Winegums wrote:
Sun Mar 04, 2018 12:34 am
I'm overjoyed that you don't care about academics striking, but I care. Academics care. The Labour party should care. It's pretty un-comradely of you to actively not give a fuck about people striking for their pensions.
Comrade? Comrade? Jesus christ, this is not 1950s Russia. This sort of shite on the left, and the braying wankers like Rees-Mogg on the right, are precisely what turns people off politics and makes people think it's all so very many students who never grew up. Which it often regrettably is.

And I said I didn't massively care about the *reasons why Hunt chose not to join the strike*, not the strike itself. The point being it shouldn't be some 'You must join or you're not a good socialist' thing, or the left will never shake off the horribly unelectable image of the 1970s that projects.

But hey, seeing as you're really concerned about people's pensions, have you heard about this thing called Brexit that is going to absolutely screw over everyone's pensions? Labour members don't like it because of the devastating effect it will have on workers, but their leaders are still pushing it through in pursuit of an unobtainable socialist pipe dream.

Perhaps, in the circumstances, you'd like to direct some of your contempt for apparent sell-outs their way?
Winegums wrote:
Sun Mar 04, 2018 12:34 am
It's not about being seen to be right or wrong, but about actually doing things that are right or wrong.
Brexit is wrong, Corbyn and McDonnell are for it. Get back to me about how the new management are different when they put the interests of the people they're there to represent and the welfare of the country - in PARTICULAR the welfare of workers in poorer areas, who will be absolutely devastated - above their desire to stick 2 fingers up to an organisation that has been responsible for decades of peace in Europe just because of 'Ew! Capitalism!'.

Because currently, the biggest contrast between now and the recent past is that in the past the opposition at least tended to oppose.
Winegums wrote:
Sun Mar 04, 2018 12:34 am
Labour wasn't electable under Brown or Miliband. The neoliberal "third way" shit has died. Maybe if you had a charismatic leader you could charm another term, but Blair killed every pretender to the throne. Even before Brexit, what the fuck were you offering people? Who's getting excited for "we'll only work you 1/2 to death"? Who was taking to the streets to leaflet for "controls on immigration"?

I look at Hillary Clinton's disasterous campaign, and I look at Blue Labour, and I honestly can't tell the difference. You see the same offerings of fuck all and utter inability to see why people are angry and upset and disengaged with politics. The needle is swinging left and you're all pushing right screaming "WE'RE ELECTABLE WE'RE ELECTABLE".
Labour are now proven not to be electable under Corbyn, given he fought a general election and lost - literally, the definition of unelectable because he was not elected. He did not win. He came, out of 2, second. The notable difference being he lost against a disastrous Tory campaign helmed by the worst Prime Minister in generations. He also benefitted from the most widespread, most coordinated vote swapping campaign UK politics has ever seen, a lacklustre performance from the UKs 3rd party, and a vast share of loaned votes because people did not want to back May's vision for the country and for Brexit.

And he STILL lost. His alleged magic grassroots support on top of all the above should have pushed him WAY over the line, at the election, but he came up so short he didn't even have enough to propose being the biggest party in a coalition. And now, he is STILL dead even or even behind in the polls despite disaster after disaster after disaster from the Tories. I mean, how much of a fucking leg up does he need?

You want to argue there needs to be something different? Fine, no problem at all. But by your own definition, Corbyn has tried and failed and is continuing to fail. The electorate clearly, CLEARLY do not want him - they may want May even less, but that is hardly a ringing endorsement, is it?

Yes, the needle swung left and you know what happened after all that noise and fuss? Fuck all. And now the clock is running out, there are the first proper signs of some sort of proper parliamentary brexit resistance, and the public mood continues to turn. Diane Abbott said something the other day about this being their big chance and the Blairites weren't going to take it from them. Well she's right - the Blairites aren't going to take it from them. Corbyn and McDonnell and her and others are simply going to give away their chance because they are so paralysed by dogma they can't seize the opportunity, and someone else is going to walk in and take it.
 
By bluebellnutter
Membership Days Membership Days Posts
#535854
The rhetoric about "Blairites taking it from us" from the likes of Abbott is amusing when the Blairites long ago realised it was pointless fighting it and instead letting it crash and burn on their own terms, something they're doing to absolute perfection.

Put simply, if the Corbynite revolution is to succeed, then Corbyn himself cannot lead it. He is destroying his own movement through his own inability to shift.
 
By Winegums
Membership Days Posts
#535860
Jesus the more I read about Hunt the more I fucking despair
Whenever Blairites attempted to be more specific [about aspiration] they risked sounding ridiculous. Such a fate befell Tristram Hunt when he gave a vivid description of the people he thought Labour should appeal to: "John Lewis couples and those who aspire to shop in Waitrose"
Anyway this is all painfully off topic for a space for cool socialist John McDonnell. I notice your post was basically BREXIT BREXIT BREXIT. Every paragraph, like a man obsessed. If you want an ELECTABLE party safe from Corbyn there is already one up and running. Actually there's another centrist meltfest on the go now too. Really your cup runneth over with parties ready to take that 48% of the vote and win parliament. I'll let you go away and have a think about why the Lib Dems are only on 7% of the vote despite clearly agitating for another referendum. Doesn't seem very electable at all...
 
By Abernathy
Membership Days Membership Days Posts
#535886
bluebellnutter wrote:
Tue Mar 06, 2018 11:43 am
Put simply, if the Corbynite revolution is to succeed, then Corbyn himself cannot lead it. He is destroying his own movement through his own inability to shift.
Yes - and there also is the reason why Corbyn's project is doomed. The cult of personality that has arisen around Corbyn and that is dedicated to ensuring that he carries on as leader forever (they hope), means that Labour is saddled with his ineffectuality for as long as Jez wants to keep on doing it - and Jez really does want to keep on doing it. He has tasted the catnip of adulation and wants to keep on toking.
 
By lord_kobel
Membership Days Posts
#535898
Winegums wrote:
Tue Mar 06, 2018 11:58 am
I'll let you go away and have a think about why the Lib Dems are only on 7% of the vote despite clearly agitating for another referendum.
Because people are still holding out faint hope that corbyn will stop being a fucking idiot and will actually start opposing the tories. When it becomes even more blindingly obvious that this isn't going to happen, they'll jump ship, possibly to the Lib Dems, where despite going into a coalition with the tories they managed to help do less damage than corbyn is helping with.
 
By crabcakes_windermere
Membership Days Posts
#535900
Winegums wrote:
Tue Mar 06, 2018 11:58 am
Jesus the more I read about Hunt the more I fucking despair
Whenever Blairites attempted to be more specific [about aspiration] they risked sounding ridiculous. Such a fate befell Tristram Hunt when he gave a vivid description of the people he thought Labour should appeal to: "John Lewis couples and those who aspire to shop in Waitrose"
Anyway this is all painfully off topic for a space for cool socialist John McDonnell. I notice your post was basically BREXIT BREXIT BREXIT. Every paragraph, like a man obsessed. If you want an ELECTABLE party safe from Corbyn there is already one up and running. Actually there's another centrist meltfest on the go now too. Really your cup runneth over with parties ready to take that 48% of the vote and win parliament. I'll let you go away and have a think about why the Lib Dems are only on 7% of the vote despite clearly agitating for another referendum. Doesn't seem very electable at all...
Yes, I'm sure ignoring everything inconvenient - including the biggest issue to face UK politics since World War 2 - and hoping it will go away will work really well. I mean, that's what Corbyn is doing and he's soaring in the polls, isn't he? So sorry for being obsessed about everyone's futures as opposed to whether Tristram Hunt was a bad, very bad or very very bad boy 3 or so years ago.

People won't suddenly switch away because of our stupid FPTP system. Some might. Lord knows, I wish loads would. But they won't. They'll just not bother voting at all because they'll be disillusioned with the whole shebang for generations, and know their vote probably makes no difference to anything as all they can do is make a tiny dent in someone's majority or choose from 'blue hard brexit' or 'red marginally less hard brexit'. So then it will come down to who can cling on to the most rump vote.

Given how many remain votes Corbyn had lent to him, and his subsequent action, it won't be him. So *you* find someone else to vote for. You'll need to sooner than I will.

And just for the record, I am a member of the Liberal Democrats already because I put my money where my mouth is. I sucked it up even though I disliked Farron hugely and was still smarting from the fact they were in the coalition and rejoined, cancelling my labour membership *specifically* because of the leadership's position on Brexit. Because the LDs at least have the right stance on the biggest issue. And at the election I lent my vote and gave my donations to Labour as what I hoped to be the best option of stopping May, and helped a Labour MP oust a Tory incumbent. I also donate to More United and Change.org to try and stop the current nonsense as best I can.

But no mate, you crack on with the jibes about centrist melts and all that and just hoping all of us inconveniences fuck off until the Labour party is lovely and pure and redder than a martian sunset. You stand your ground and deal with the important stuff - who has been disloyal? Who dares criticise the leadership? Who isn't singing the red flag loud enough? You be like McDonnell - more concerned with looking good for Morning Star photoshoots and having a good old rant to the faithful than actually lifting a finger to stop something that only today has caused this:

https://amp.theguardian.com/business/20 ... ssion=true

Because if that's socialism now - not actually *doing* anything to help thousands of actual factory workers, but just making sure you're seen to be supporting them in the right way when the cameras are around, and complaining that people who get upset on their behalf are 'obsessed' - then you're welcome to it.

EDIT: Oh look, here are some more workers JMcD can sympathise with when his inaction sends their jobs up the swanny. Still, I'm just obsessed, aren't I?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-43300201
Malcolm Armsteen, youngian, davidjay and 4 others liked this
  • 1
  • 15
  • 16
  • 17
  • 18
  • 19
GE 2020

I wouldn't trust him not to....

Momentum

She could replace Godsiff tmrw as far as I'm con[…]

David Cameron

Yes, I got that feeling too? Of course. Even i[…]

The sad faces of wronged Mail readers

We used to have to ask to take our blazer/jacket i[…]