Labour leadership

[Louis MacNeice]

Not exactly sure what ameliorationist means to be honest but I tip my hat to you - it has a nice ring to it, whatever it is.

I suppose the wider point is this - Labour tacked left and lost. Now, I'm not suggesting that it was a left-wing prospectus as I suspect you would categorically understand it to be - merely that it was instead a more left-wing prospectus than any that Labour have campaigned on since I have had the vote and Labour lost and, it seems, they lost because of it.

Now, maybe your position is that winning on a Miliband major prospectus would have been an unwanted pyrrhic victory and that the correct medicine to lead to power, the proper remedy, would have been a proper left-wing line that would have lead to power but I see zero evidence for that.

And to clarify - I am almost certainly right of most here, hence the opprobrium typified by any number of posts on the previous pages, and, heaven forfend, I generally take a left of centre libertarian social-democratic point of view.

No you don't. If you really think that you do, then it says a lot about the depth of your political ignorance.

Cheers - Louis MacNeice

p.s. Libertarian social democrat is an oxymoron unless you empty libertarian and/or social democracy of all their historic content regarding freedom and the state.

 

[Louis MacNeice]

,

So there is a mass of silent voters who sat on their hands because they were not sufficiently inspired by more left-wing policies?

Is that your position?

Why did they not vote for anyone at all?[/QUOTE]

Because nobody was addressing their needs; because at best in our electoral arithmetic, no one felt the need to, and at worst they could actually see benefit in marginalizing, vilifying and demonizing some of those needs and the people experiencing them.

Cheers - Louis MacNeice

 

[Artaxerxes]

So there is a mass of silent voters who sat on their hands because they were not sufficiently inspired by more left-wing policies?

Is that your position?

Why did they not vote for anyone at all?

Systemic apathy to the electoral system and distrust of politicians.

 

[andysays]

Wow. That is clever big man.

Round of applause for learning how to use the strike through function.

Take you a long time to get your head around that?

Thanks for the applause, but it's really not necessary.

It did take me a little while to learn, but I persevered and got there in the end. Maybe that could be some encouragement to you in learning how to write comments which actually have some value and don't regularly get you dismissed as a twat who has nothing to say but is determined to say it anyway.

Although that would require you to acknowledge that you still have something to learn, and the arrogance you constantly display suggests that will be way beyond you, so it's considerably less likely to happen than JC becoming the next PM.

 

[andysays]

In other news, I still haven't heard anything about my attempt to become an affiliated member.

The phone number given here seems to be overwhelmed with calls, so I've sent in an enquiry through the website and asked Unite look into it for me.

Anyone else still waiting?

 

[Whagwan]

Well, I've been temporarily de-purged:

Thank you for your email. Please take this email as acknowledgement of receipt of your appeal against the decision of the NEC panel regarding your membership application.

As you have sent us this appeal, you will receive a vote in the current leadership election. If you have already cast your vote, this will be counted.

As you will appreciate we are dealing with a high volume of correspondence. Please be assured that we will be in touch soon regarding the progress of your appeal.

 

[campanula]

Does anyone know the extent of the purges - my postman has just been complaining that he has been purged because of his union membership (not very clear about the entire reason) and this seems to be an increasingly worrying issue (at least for any semblance of democracy). Surely, if these purges are far reaching enough to overturn the obvious results of a Corbyn win, they would render the whole process null and void...or does the electorate (again) have to suck it up and live with it. I can't help feeling a bit sick - even though we know Labour is an omnishambles, I guess a result for any of the robotic contenders absolutely signifies the utter redundancy of even pretending to have any parliamentary engagement...and it is back to peasant's revolts. (which obviously, I am up for - I even have a spare pitchfork)

 

[campanula]

And for no reason whatsoever other than a need to get it off my chest and say out loud - 'Diamond is a prick'. I have never felt it necessary to publicly state my disdain for another poster, not even the interminably annoying (and mysteriously absent) BA...but really, Diamond just takes the award for overweening pomposity and a severe lack of originality, imagination or even a smidgeon of self-awareness - no doubt he will be smirking at this reference as proof of his own self importance.

eta - I would probably find him amusing if he was 17...

 

[Pickman's model]

No, no, no.

I have been off these boards for a while and I won't be back on for a while still but when ignorant fuckers try and have a go, I will have a go back.

i don't know why you bother because you always end up looking stupider than when you began. and you looked pretty fucking stupid then.

 

[ViolentPanda]

Yep, never heard of that "ameliroationist" term. Maybe it stands front and foremost in your niche thinking and I do like it and now understand it as a consequence of your explanation, for which many thanks, however it is hardly an essential part of the parliamentary lexicon.

Niche thinking? it's mainstream. Discuss neoliberalism seriously with anyone who knows what they're talking about in the last 30 years, and they'll know exactly what you mean, unless they're pretending to knowledge they don't have.

Now, to step through the next few points.

First, was the Labour prospectus of 2015 more left-wing than that of the (i) first, 2010, (ii) second, 2005, (iii) third, 2001, and (iv) 1997 prospectuses, and if not how and why?

You tell me. I'm not here to do research for you.
I will tell you what you'll find, though. You'll find that if you weigh the pros and cons of each "prospectus", then apart from '97 (which had several "left-friendly" policies that were then set aside, such as abolition of JSA and its' replacement with a more "humane" benefit), it all turns out to be much of a muchness.

I do fully accept your "economically-incompetent" point though. Labour quite frankly didn't have the cojones to come out swinging and point out that they had steered the ship through extremely troubled water which they had very little responsibility for. Now, sure, a succession of governments made serious fiscal mistakes but that wasn't the heart of the matter at all, merely an exposed symptom subsequent a serious, systemic crisis.

It wasn't, sadly, a case of not having the stones, but a political calculation offered by Labour's "brains trust", including the likes of David Miliband, Ed Balls and Lord Mandelson, to look dignified. The cost of their party's dignity was power.

And, finally, maybe you see a contradiction between the two terms of "libertarian" and "social democratic" - I categorically do not but obviously that is a question of pure ideology. If people want to give me flack for it - fair enough, that's their choice but I'm certainly not going to retreat from such attacks, such as they are.

Categorically, eh?
Lets put those descriptions in categorical terms:

"Libertarian" - one who follows and/or promotes a doctrine of personal liberty.

"Social democratic" - pertaining to a politico-economic system that promotes a utilitarian democracy across society.

The two don't really go together, even in a liberalistic social democracy.

 

[Pickman's model]

Niche thinking? it's mainstream. Discuss neoliberalism seriously with anyone who knows what they're talking about in the last 30 years, and they'll know exactly what you mean, unless they're pretending to knowledge they don't have.



You tell me. I'm not here to do research for you.
I will tell you what you'll find, though. You'll find that if you weigh the pros and cons of each "prospectus", then apart from '97 (which had several "left-friendly" policies that were then set aside, such as abolition of JSA and its' replacement with a more "humane" benefit), it all turns out to be much of a muchness.


It wasn't, sadly, a case of not having the stones, but a political calculation offered by Labour's "brains trust", including the likes of David Miliband, Ed Balls and Lord Mandelson, to look dignified. The cost of their party's dignity was power.



Categorically, eh?
Lets put those descriptions in categorical terms:

"Libertarian" - one who follows and/or promotes a doctrine of personal liberty.

"Social democratic" - pertaining to a politico-economic system that promotes a utilitarian democracy across society.

The two don't really go together, even in a liberalistic social democracy.

i don't know why you waste your time, it's not like he'll understand what you've said.

 

[ViolentPanda]

No you don't. If you really think that you do, then it says a lot about the depth of your political ignorance.

Cheers - Louis MacNeice

p.s. Libertarian social democrat is an oxymoron unless you empty libertarian and/or social democracy of all their historic content regarding freedom and the state.

Quite.

 

[ViolentPanda]

And for no reason whatsoever other than a need to get it off my chest and say out loud - 'Diamond is a prick'. I have never felt it necessary to publicly state my disdain for another poster, not even the interminably annoying (and mysteriously absent) BA...but really, Diamond just takes the award for overweening pomposity and a severe lack of originality, imagination or even a smidgeon of self-awareness - no doubt he will be smirking at this reference as proof of his own self importance.

eta - I would probably find him amusing if he was 17...

Butchersapron isn't "mysteriously absent". There's still cricket being played!

 

[ViolentPanda]

i don't know why you waste your time, it's not like he'll understand what you've said.

I labour under the delusion that some light may one day shine in his benighted noggin.

 

[Pickman's model]

I labour under the delusion that some light may one day shine in his benighted noggin.

only when you open his skull with a wrecking bar.

 

[campanula]

Butchersapron isn't "mysteriously absent". There's still cricket being played!

What - all day and all night? Continually? There are still bulbs to be planted and weeds to be dug but nothing which prevents me from having the odd rant on a message board...and for such a prolific poster as BA, I did find his absence slightly...odd (although he did manage an inflammatory (and baffling) pm to me before vanishing so perhaps a little r&r was in order)

 

[ViolentPanda]

only when you open his skull with a wrecking bar.

(((((wrecking bar)))))

 

[andysays]

Butchersapron isn't "mysteriously absent". There's still cricket being played!

You sure he's not off campaigning for Liz Kendall?

And in response to campanula, BA can be annoying at times, but he is far better informed and far better at both constructing and deconstructing an argument than most other posters here. Hopefully he'll be back soon feeling refreshed and ready to go

 

[Belushi]

What - all day and all night? Continually? There are still bulbs to be planted and weeds to be dug but nothing which prevents me from having the odd rant on a message board...and for such a prolific poster as BA, I did find his absence slightly...odd (although he did manage an inflammatory (and baffling) pm to me before vanishing so perhaps a little r&r was in order)

I've also been wondering where he's got to.

 

[emanymton]

And for no reason whatsoever other than a need to get it off my chest and say out loud - 'Diamond is a prick'. I have never felt it necessary to publicly state my disdain for another poster, not even the interminably annoying (and mysteriously absent) BA...but really, Diamond just takes the award for overweening pomposity and a severe lack of originality, imagination or even a smidgeon of self-awareness - no doubt he will be smirking at this reference as proof of his own self importance.

eta - I would probably find him amusing if he was 17...

He is a prick so please, please everyone stop responding to him.

And since you mention it, does anyone know where BA has hot to.

 

[ItWillNeverWork]

I've also been wondering where he's got to.

Yeah, me too.

 

[Pickman's model]

He is a prick so please, please everyone stop responding to him.

And since you mention it, does anyone know where BA has hot to.

he's enjoying a well-earned rest in montego bay

 

[Lurdan]

Corbyn shares the cover of yesterday's issue of Libération with Freddie Krueger but on page 2...

(it's almost as if they weren't taking this election entirely seriously)

 

[phildwyer]

Jesus arse-fucking Christ. You hold forth as if you have a modicum of understanding of modern British Parliamentary politics, yet you're "not sure" what "ameliorationist" means, even though the term has been around in PolSci for as long as PolSci has existed. It's the politics of sugar-coating the policies of your opposition, in order that there's a "difference" between parties. "

No it's not, you ignorant blowhard. It's one who believes a problem can be solved gradually. It's like "reformist." Most commonly used to designate a position in the anti-slavery campaigns of the C19th. Fool that you are.

 

[JimW]

No it's not, you ignorant blowhard. It's one who believes a problem can be solved gradually. It's like "reformist." Most commonly used to designate a position in the anti-slavery campaigns of the C19th. Fool that you are.

Google still working your end then, Phil.

 

[phildwyer]

Google still working your end then, Phil.

Hah I spit on Google. It's a basic term of political science, everyone knows what it means. Except VP it seems.

 

[existentialist]

Google still working your end then, Phil.

Charm school's certainly paid off

 

[brogdale]

Google still working your end then, Phil.

 

[brogdale]

Hah I spit on Google. It's a basic term of political science, everyone knows what it means. Except VP it seems.

Not sure it's that 'basic' tbh, I'd have thought that terms like reformist, gradualist or possiblist might crop up before that word?

 

[belboid]

Not sure it's that 'basic' tbh, I'd have thought that terms like reformist, gradualist or possiblist might crop up before that word?

for 'basic' read 'somewhat antiquated'