HoratioCuthbert
Deep seated inconsequence
The customary thing is to work out what you're saving in Freddos.
Last edited:
Keir Starmer's time is up
- Thread starter agricola
- Start date
Before you can have a policy, you first have to problematise a set of social conditions. Conditions exist and people are hurt by them but they are not a “problem” until people define them as such.
The way that conditions are problematised determines their origin and thus how they can/should be responded to. Economists might problematise them in terms of misaligned incentives, and this means the solution must involve new incentives. Theologians might problematise the same circumstances in terms of religious morality, with very different solutions.
In turn, this problematisation will depend on underlying ideology, of course. And therein we get the problem. Starting from different places gets you to different results.
So I would say that all government policies are aimed at social good. The problem isn’t the aim as such, it’s what the aim means. The problem is who gets to define “social good” and what ideology underlies that definition.
Last edited:
two sheds
Least noticed poster 2007
probably things to replace services that the council will have to cut because of it.
Rob Ray
Weight is meaningless
If Starmpot wins then it won't even be close, he'll be much more hateable than Kinnock. Labour in power is likely to be worse than even the current Tories on many issues, because the opposition will be pushing to make them seem like overgenerous lefties. They'll flood the media with that shit and the blue Labour headbangers in charge will be falling over themselves to come up with Tough Policies to counter it. They're already doing so for that matter.
Rob Ray
Weight is meaningless
All policies involve some form of social control because it specifically involves government intervention to change an existing aspect of society. Sometimes this is with benign intent.
Even the most regressive, right-wing Tory bill (like the small boats one) has a benign intent from the ideological perspective of those proposing it. Their aim isn’t to be evil, like some cartoon villain. It’s a solution to a particular problematisation that has been framed through a particular ideology.
There is, but I don’t think there is anywhere near as much of that at the heart of government policy as a lot of well-meaning lefties tend to assume. There doesn’t need to be corruption to benefit the rich if your ideology is framed around neoliberal economics. If you really believe in neoliberalism then anything that creates market barriers is acting to hurt people, so policies that destroy them are a social good.
The39thStep
Urban critical thinker
Funnily enough last night I had a flashback to Kinnock falling over in the sea and thought it would great if that happened to Starmer as well.
TopCat
Putin fanboy
Maybe he will shit himself during an anti socialist speech
Spandex
A crazy bulbous punchbag of sound
I'd rather he fell over like Tommy Cooper did on 15/04/84.
Smokeandsteam
Working Class First
Which issues are those?
The39thStep
Urban critical thinker
Only if it was in the middle of Starmer doing one of those one man plays with two characters
The39thStep
Urban critical thinker
Worse ? In what way?
Pickman's model
Starry Wisdom
the only plus point shammer has, imo, is that you're never likely to be asked to make him a cup of tea. and if you are i hope your ethics on spiking would on that occasion be flexible
Rob Ray
Weight is meaningless
I already answered, but the model to look at is Blairism, because it's the same basic process. Blair hammered benefits as a method of proving Labour was tougher on shirkers than the Tories, so expect more of this. And Starsngarters is already pushing hard on law and order, where he will vie with the Tories on who can come up with the most punitive bullshit. That'll most likely extend to anti-protest stuff, where Starmer's already indicated he's up for some good old fashioned exemplary sentencing and will be pressured to go full bore (to the point of being challenged for accepting money from JSO donors) by the press. Bear in mind, he probably won't go much further than the Tories in terms of pledges at the election itself, but what he definitely will do is avoid challenging what they're putting in place now, and look for ways to "innovate further solutions" to what he'll be wanting to portray as their unwillingness to get the house in order. That's the process of the creep right in action.
Pickman's model
Starry Wisdom
as you'll remember, what blair did was bring in the terrorism act 2000 which was then extensively used against protestors.
The39thStep
Urban critical thinker
I agree with you that he will avoid challenging what the Tories are doing and promise to look at innovative solutions or whatever guff he reads out . However disappointing he will be though , and he might well equal them on some issues , I can’t really believe he will be worse .
Pickman's model
Starry Wisdom
give him time
SpookyFrank
A cheap source of teeth for aquarium gravel
My council tax has gone up about five quid a month. A Freddo is something daft like 65p now so what's that, seven Freddos a month? Eight?
That'll cancel out the real-terms reduction in the tax free allowance for sure.
ska invita
back on the other side
The pattern seems to be Tories run down public services and New Labour privatise them. Starmers most recent interviews suggest a new wave of PFIs incoming. Is that worse than the Tories? One for philosophy students to argue over
Pickman's model
Starry Wisdom
While there still are philosophy students.
redsquirrel
This Machine Kills Progressives
Lovely
magneze
🎧
More of a continuance.
ska invita
back on the other side
kind of bad cop good cop routine, all cops thoughMore of a continuance.
Similar threads
