Labour Party Watch

What can we do to change the minds of decision makers and people in general to actually do something about preparing for the forthcoming economic/energy crises (the ones after this one!)?

Moderator: Peak Moderation

Lurkalot
Posts: 269
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 10:45 pm

Post by Lurkalot »

Having a "putting the world to rights" session or a few mates around a pub table to give it it's other name we came to a similar conclusion to what UE has put and we decided that what is really needed is a left wing party that upholds the principals of nationalisation and the NHS etc while also embracing the concept of limiting or controlling immigration.
johnhemming2
Posts: 2159
Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2015 10:01 pm

Post by johnhemming2 »

The BNP were indeed that.
johnhemming2
Posts: 2159
Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2015 10:01 pm

Post by johnhemming2 »

UndercoverElephant wrote:It might result in chaos in the Labour Party.
That is already there.
User avatar
UndercoverElephant
Posts: 11247
Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2008 12:00 am
Location: south east England

Post by UndercoverElephant »

johnhemming2 wrote:The BNP were indeed that.
Except the BNP is almost always described as "far right", not "left wing".

Those labels probably aren't helpful. I think we all know what sort of party is required.
johnhemming2
Posts: 2159
Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2015 10:01 pm

Post by johnhemming2 »

The BNP were/are a national socialist party.

They are also explicitly racist. (which UKIP are not).
Little John
Posts: 8683
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2008 12:07 am
Location: UK

Post by Little John »

A socialist government in the old fashioned sense of that word (see Cuba for details, though it is unlikely we would ever go that far in this country), that limits its primary goals to the territory within its own national borders and where its first priority is to its own citizens.

This is not to say that it shouldn't seek to create mutually beneficial links across the world, in particular with other like minded nations. But, that these are secondary to the primary objective of looking after its own citizens first and foremost.

I would vote for that and I couldn't care less what it's called. If that is national socialism, then I am a national socialist.
User avatar
UndercoverElephant
Posts: 11247
Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2008 12:00 am
Location: south east England

Post by UndercoverElephant »

johnhemming2 wrote:The BNP were/are a national socialist party.
Which means the terminology is very confusing. Socialism is left wing, nationalism is neither left wing nor right wing (are the SNP right wing?), but somehow if you mix socialism and nationalism then you are "far right" nazis. Except the SNP are nationalists and socialists. Are they nazis?
johnhemming2
Posts: 2159
Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2015 10:01 pm

Post by johnhemming2 »

There are more than one dimensions to political ideology. Fitting a multi dimensional reality to a one dimensional system of measurement will inevitably cause difficulties.
User avatar
emordnilap
Posts: 14631
Joined: Wed Sep 05, 2007 4:36 pm
Location: here

Post by emordnilap »

Lurkalot wrote:Having a "putting the world to rights" session or a few mates around a pub table to give it it's other name we came to a similar conclusion to what UE has put and we decided that what is really needed is a left wing party that upholds the principals of nationalisation and the NHS etc while also embracing the concept of limiting or controlling immigration.
From The Guardian's coverage of the BAFTAs:
Ken Loach, whose gritty, angry I, Daniel Blake won the outstanding British film award, was most passionate.

The 80-year-old thanked Bafta for endorsing a truth “that the most vulnerable and poorest people are treated by this government with a contempt and a callous brutality that is disgraceful ... it is a brutality that extends to keeping out refugee children we promised to help.”

Loach said the world was getting darker and there was a struggle coming between the rich, the powerful and the rest of us. “The film-makers know which side they’re on.”

Later he went further, saying that the “government had to be removed”. He hoped that voters would see his film, but there was little point politicians doing so, as “the people actually implementing these decisions know what they’re doing. It’s conscious.”

Their welfare policies, he said, harked back to the Victorian workhouse ethos of telling people that poverty was their fault. “They know they’re doing. We have to change them; they have to be removed.
It was a really good film from an outstanding man.
I experience pleasure and pains, and pursue goals in service of them, so I cannot reasonably deny the right of other sentient agents to do the same - Steven Pinker
Lurkalot
Posts: 269
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 10:45 pm

Post by Lurkalot »

When we decided that the Labour Party should look at accepting some form of immigration control we did so because we wanted there to be a chance of a future labour government. From talking to people we all came to the same conclusion that immigration is a key issue and constantly being told that immigrants aren't a problem and that they enrich our society tends to make people feel they're being spoken down to and that attitude is what is driving many to vote for those like ukip . We feel we are a small island that is already crowded , and can't feed , clothe or provide fuel for the population we have , we see green belt disappearing and can't see how bringing in more can possibly help the situation. The plight of the children is of course destressing and emotional and I don't think any rational person would want to deny help.
Little John
Posts: 8683
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2008 12:07 am
Location: UK

Post by Little John »

It is the current insane wider immigration policies in conjunction with the inexorable driving down of pay and conditions in an ever decreasing pool of available work alongside shop-worn liberal accusations of being bigoted morons to anyone who has had the temerity to complain about the ugly reality of globalism for the internal proletariat of this country that has led to hardened hearts for refugee children amongst that proletariat.

We reap what we sow.
User avatar
UndercoverElephant
Posts: 11247
Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2008 12:00 am
Location: south east England

Post by UndercoverElephant »

Lurkalot wrote:When we decided that the Labour Party should look at accepting some form of immigration control we did so because we wanted there to be a chance of a future labour government. From talking to people we all came to the same conclusion that immigration is a key issue and constantly being told that immigrants aren't a problem and that they enrich our society tends to make people feel they're being spoken down to and that attitude is what is driving many to vote for those like ukip . We feel we are a small island that is already crowded , and can't feed , clothe or provide fuel for the population we have , we see green belt disappearing and can't see how bringing in more can possibly help the situation. The plight of the children is of course destressing and emotional and I don't think any rational person would want to deny help.
Yes.
johnhemming2
Posts: 2159
Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2015 10:01 pm

Post by johnhemming2 »

Actually there does seem to be a more substantive shift against Labour in the white working class areas. There was a by election recently won by the greens off Labour where Labour came third behind the Lib Dems. This seems more substantive than in 1983. (I first fought a parliamentary election in 1983)
User avatar
UndercoverElephant
Posts: 11247
Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2008 12:00 am
Location: south east England

Post by UndercoverElephant »

johnhemming2 wrote:Actually there does seem to be a more substantive shift against Labour in the white working class areas. There was a by election recently won by the greens off Labour where Labour came third behind the Lib Dems. This seems more substantive than in 1983. (I first fought a parliamentary election in 1983)
This is not 1983. Corbyn is ideologically a bit like Michael Foot, but I do not believe this is the reason why Labour are suffering more now than they were then (if it is true). The problem, I think, really is connected to immigration. It's much hotter potato now than it was then, and Corbyn's position really is suicidal. It is a deal-breaker for large numbers of people who would otherwise be very likely to vote Labour.
johnhemming2
Posts: 2159
Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2015 10:01 pm

Post by johnhemming2 »

I don't think we disagree that much on this. Corbyn is, however, more left wing that Michael Foot.
Post Reply