butchersapron
Bring back hanging
How long have you been a member of the labour party?
Corbyn & Cabinet in the Media
- Thread starter ska invita
- Start date
So you list something the tories are barely opposed to, and something that is effectively a huge regressive tax that subsidises the middle class.
hows about this MarkyMarrk?
littlebabyjesus
one of Maxwell's demons
Put people in debt right at the start of their adult lives and you keep them compliant - thinking about themselves and themselves only. That's a part of it. As for it being a subsidy for the middle class, if you think the middle class isn't contributing enough, you increase the rate of income tax accordingly. If you look at the stats for the demographic of those attending university you will see that, no surprises, fewer people from poorer backgrounds are now attending since the privatisation of the system.
The commodification of services, of life. What was once a right, you now have to pay for. If it can't be monetised, it shouldn't exist.
Pickman's model
Starry Wisdom
you do know the per capita spend in higher education has been declining for a quarter of a century or more? don't matter if the government's been labour or tory, a lower spend per student means less staff per student and fewer library books per student.
existentialist
Tired and unemotional
Given that this thread is about Corbyn, it can be no surprise that the relative behaviours of Tories and New Labour are being compared alongside the Corbyn position. You may regard the latter as being excessively left-wing, and be that as it may, but the fact remains that, in comparison to what Corbyn & Co are saying (and which appears to have the support of a lot of the grass-roots membership), there is not a huge gulf in practical terms between Blairite policy and that of the Tories. We have seen, time and again, Labour refuse to present any significant opposition to even the most vicious policy initiatives from either the present government or the Coalition, and many of the leadership candidates (remember, the ones who, put together, still polled less than Corbyn managed by himself) have also made it clear that they support much of the present government's strategies on austerity, welfare, etc.
You may not like that - and that is your right - but you really aren't going to get anywhere with a nitpicking approach to Corbyn's policies while you're still apparently so ready to whitewash the ills of his competitors in "blue" Labour.
Last edited:
This is untrue. The proportion of working class students attending university has increased.
You're in favour of working class people subsidising a largely middle or upper class activity. It was middle and upper class when everyone got a grant and it is now.
Pickman's model
Starry Wisdom
so you're a tory
Popular with the new membership but not the electorate.
What do you know about blue labour? Have you read the book?
about what?
Pickman's model
Starry Wisdom
How long have you been a member of the Labour party?
Why do you want to know?
existentialist
Tired and unemotional
No. I don't read politics books: I have no pretensions to being a political theorist, and would quite happily admit to being "politically naive" (by which I mean that I knew few of the terms of art, and even less of the general miasma of ideological dogmatism and posturing that infests politics).
But, if your contributions are indicative of the level of discourse that someone who does read political books possesses (although I doubt that), then I don't feel that my particular brand of political naivety puts me at all that much of a disadvantage.
Pickman's model
Starry Wisdom
oh dear oh dear
existentialist
Tired and unemotional
You know, when I saw killer b restate his question, my gut reaction was "I wonder how MarkyMarrk will try and prevaricate on this one".
Nice to know you haven't disappointed.
belboid
Exasperated, not angry.
the proportion of all classes attending university has increased. The rise in w-c attendance is significantly lower than the rise in middle-class atendance
existentialist
Tired and unemotional
I think he's the classic example of someone who thinks he's the first one to have new ideas, and thinks he's a metric shedload more savvy than he actually is.
Coupled with a fairly major tendency towards assuming that everyone he's arguing with even more stupid than he actually is.
He only asked the question once that j saw
I was going to open up a discussion about blue labour
Curious how deep your apparent expertise in the views and workings of the CLPs is.
existentialist
Tired and unemotional
That shouldn't be difficult to clarify, one way or the other.
FYI, here is where he's asked the question:
Corbyn & Cabinet in the Media
(to which you responded, asking him why he wanted to know, so your plea of ignorance rings a little hollow)
So yes, he has now asked it twice. And yet you're still prevaricating.
existentialist
Tired and unemotional
Not on this thread, I trust...
belboid
Exasperated, not angry.
so why dont you answer it? I'm intrigued now. My guess would be you've been a member about one minute longer than those you're criticising
butchersapron
Bring back hanging
Are you a member of the labour party MarkyMarrk?
Take what I say and argue against it. I'm not arguing from authority - that's a position taken by those not confident or open to change.
Guess away
likesfish
You can't park here sir
Because the soviets got rid of the ss20 medium range tactical nuke a multilateral agreement.
IF no cruise misslies zero reason for the soviets to negociate.
Natos plan was to die trying to stop the soviet juggernaught.
Warsaw pacts plan was to launch a spoiling attack to stop a Nato attack.
Fact niether plans were terribly realistic Nato never really had a realistic stockpile of weapons for even the 6 weeks of war before nukes flew
Warsaw pact had the tanks and weapons they didnt have the trucks and tankers to support the attack in anywhere near the numbers needed.
Similar threads
- Poll
