DotCommunist
So many particulars. So many questions.
and is it not, in its own way, paternalism from a slightly different stripe of elites?
has there ever been a lamer labour leader than ed miliband?
- Thread starter _angel_
- Start date
and is it not, in its own way, paternalism from a slightly different stripe of elites?
Meltingpot
Living in our pools we soon forget about the sea
(And Norman) OK, I'm outgunned here. The setting up still took some doing though; the consultants had to be bought off for one thing. Nye Bevan said he'd "stuffed their mouths with gold."
frogwoman
No amount of cajolery...
It was. from my hazy memory of doing liberal reforms by asquith and co in a level history much of the contemporary concern (although not all) among the top echelons of the society about the state of the slums etc was actually due to fears of how Britain would fare in a war.
SpineyNorman
Inappropriate content removed
Yep, and there was agreement across the political spectrum that universal healthcare provision should be introduced (well, it was already there - it started by necessity during the war). I think the Liberals wanted an insurance based scheme but, if memory serves, the Tories were ready to introduce essentially the same thing as Labour did.
frogwoman
No amount of cajolery...
Don't get me wrong i think Bevan was genuine. however, why was the capitalist class in general willing to allow this (despite a few token bits of opposition?)
Meltingpot
Living in our pools we soon forget about the sea
SpineyNorman
Inappropriate content removed
Precisely - just because the NHS came about for reasons other than Bevan being a nice bloke, that doesn't mean he wasn't a nice bloke. And the NHS and the welfare state may not have been exactly the same as they were had the Tories been elected.
SpineyNorman
Inappropriate content removed
DotCommunist
So many particulars. So many questions.
I do recall reading somewhere about how very shocked the m/c doctors were at the state of some of the ww1 recruits. Malnutrition and easily treatable wrongs rife amongst the troops. all very mathew arnold/gin alley methodist 'oh the poor dears' attitudes
SpineyNorman
Inappropriate content removed
Beveridge report innit.
[erm, from page 1, admittedly] Ramsey Macdonald, James Callaghan,Neil Kinnock,Hugh Gaitskill, Harriet Harman - he's no better or worse than any of these. Since his election his party have done very well in the polls for over a year now. The Blairite hard right wing of the party have launched an open attack on him via their journo contacts over the last month - don't buy their hype.
This.
(Also from page one, but will get back properly another time)
Find a way by anyone, by Miliband or anyone else, that will stop the above being a largely accurate refection of what very large chunks of the electorate (and not just Tories) are already thoroughly convinced of.
If so, political genius accolades and Daily Mailism destruction awards await you.
Find a way by anyone, by Miliband or anyone else, that will stop the above being a largely accurate refection of what very large chunks of the electorate (and not just Tories) are already thoroughly convinced of.
If so, political genius accolades and Daily Mailism destruction awards await you.
SaskiaJayne
Rural Guerrilla
Its what the voters will think, helped along by the Tory press at general election time.
grogwilton
Well-Known Member
That and the yanks were worried about Western Europe falling to Stalinism, so they poured money into it. IIRR the Vespa factory was built using Marshall Aid money. They got a lot of it back through orders of american goods though.
Meltingpot
Living in our pools we soon forget about the sea
I have a friend who reckons that what's needed right now is a full page advert, in all our national papers, on behalf of the poor. Just wondering if that would work.
ItWillNeverWork
Messy Crimbobs, fellow humans.
So how long is it before we see a challenge to Millibots' leadership? Who will be the possible contenders?
_angel_
.
My sis says this also!
_angel_
.
I reckon most people don't know who he is tbh. That might explain a lot.
Butchers is absolutely right. Miliband is no better or worse than any other Labour leader. And far from 'selling out' or 'betraying', anything, Labour are just doing what they were set up to do, which is trying to deploy strategies to get elected and run capitalism with concessions for the non-rich. Labour may have contained militant socialists and may still have a few, but the party was never supposed to be militantly socialist and never will be. The concessions for the non-rich have become fewer as the super-rich have reasserted their authority and are going to get fewer still, as the only way any party can be elected in the post-socialist age is to placate the super-rich.
And there are no answers for opponents of capitalism, in terms of government, outside the Labour Party either.
And there are no answers for opponents of capitalism, in terms of government, outside the Labour Party either.
_angel_
.
look, the reason I'm saying he's worse is nothing to do with politics btw. I'm amazed anyone would think that I expected him to be somehow actually left wing in the first place. He looks and sounds like a wet fart. He can't argue, he can't project himself, he can't speak and even makes Gordon Brown look good.
It doesn't matter. If the circumstances are right, he can still be elected. Personal qualities are always subject to manipulation by the media and political opponents anyway.
ItWillNeverWork
Messy Crimbobs, fellow humans.
I'd rather no manipulation was needed.
_angel_
.
I think it does matter actually. No one is going to vote for him, I bet most people don't even know who he is tbh, but would only vote labour cos they're not the tories, which, of course they are.
ItWillNeverWork
Messy Crimbobs, fellow humans.
I think you underestimate people.
What you or anybody else would 'rather' is totally irrelevant.
Of course millions will vote for him as the only alternative to the Tories. They're mostly voting for the party anyway, not individuals. All memory of New Labour fiascos will be forgotten in the rush to get rid of the Tories. Labour know it and so does capital.
And Labour are not Tories-it's just that all parties embraced the compulsory neo-liberal agenda. They have to work within that framework, which becomes more extreme as socialism recedes into history.
Similar threads
