Labour leadership

[Maurice Picarda]

But it wouldn't be portrayed in such absurd terms anywhere. Except here, perhaps.

 

[DotCommunist]

could we really see boris win a leadership battle though? hypothetically? he may have a lot of lol boris the ledge fans amongst the wider public but Darth May would devil his kidneys and eat them if he stood in the way of the throne

 

[Pickman's model]

could we really see boris win a leadership battle though? hypothetically? he may have a lot of lol boris the ledge fans amongst the wider public but Darth May would devil his kidneys and eat them if he stood in the way of the throne

one of the areas in which he might struggle is his great association with london and the south-east and not, say, with the shires.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

Hey don't get all drunk-rage at me. Where I grew up things like a min wage really seemed like a big deal at the time, so shove your smug self-satisfaction up your arse. Not everyone operates at your Olympian heights of theory

The effect of a national minimum wage on low wages is complex, though. The countries with the highest effective minimum wages don't have a national minimum wage - the likes of Sweden and Denmark. Instead, they have legal protections for union rights and collectively bargained minimum wages per sector, all of which are way higher than the UK's level. Where there is a constant state of bargaining between employers and employees via an effective collective bargaining structure, you get much better results than a top-down imposed rate that has not directly been negotiated at all.

There are arguments that a minimum wage set too low has an effect of depressing lower-end wages - it becomes not just a minimum wage but also effectively a maximum wage for certain kinds of jobs.

 

[ViolentPanda]

Oh come on. Labour delivered a lot of their manifesto post 97. Minimum wage etc against the same press that Corbyn faces today. How'd they do that? Play the game better than the papers did. Fuck all point in being idealogically pure if there's no sniff of power, other than smug points down the revolutionary council.

That's a pretty sorry revision of history. By the time "new" Labour won the '97 election, they already had The Sun, The Times, The News of the Screws, The Times, both Express titles and both Telegraph titles "on-board". Criticism was deliberately muted in order to give Blair's "third way" (basically the same old neoliberalism, but with a smiley face) a chance. The media loved it, and the City loved it.
If victory is predicated on pissing over any vaguely humane political principles you hold, then I'd say that isn't a "price worth paying". Your view probably differs, but I wouldn't trust anyone who sold their principles so cheaply, let alone politicians that did. It's all very well to gob on about pragmatism, but power without principle is a heavy price to pay for being supposedly pragmatic.

 

[ViolentPanda]

Q. How do we get the sun and the mail and the express on on our side?

A. By doing what the sun the mail and the express want.

Yep. The right-wing press pretty much studiedly stood aside from directly supporting the Tories for the last couple of years of Major's government, and not just because they supposedly knew that Labour would win, but because they knew that doing so would effectively "promote" new Labour without engaging in active support that would disenchant their core readerships. Labour's victory was partially manufactured by those very papers. TheHoodedClaw has put the cart before the horse.

 

[ViolentPanda]

Fucking hell, i can understand anger and desperation - but pimping blair? Isn't that spitting in the face of of all those people that you're being angry on behalf of? First act, an attack on single mothers - did they need to work to get the mail sun and express on side on that one?

People criticise (rightly) Iain Dunked-in Shit for his attacks on sick and disabled people, but tend to forget that the whole process started as soon as Blair won with the creation of the "Benefits Integrity Project", aimed at interrogating people receiving disability benefits. The project was shelved in 2000/2001 after causing a lot of problems for disabled people.

 

[gimesumtruf]

Talking of the past is very good and you are all very knowledgeable but what is the future for the leader when Laura Kuenssberg and many others are making him ( Corbyn ) look as though he has so little control of, well anything.
I'm thinking a socialist future is looking soul achingly, a long way off.

 

[Brainaddict]

Here's some advice for free, Johnny-lad. When you're the shadow chancellor, and your chances of becoming actual chancellor are already quite slim because half the country thinks you're a stinkin' commie, don't go waving Mao's little red book around in parliament, even as a way of insulting the opposition.

It's fine, that's for free. No, don't thank me, just try not to be a fucking idiot.

Do Jez and John have no-one advising them at all? I can't imagine the conversation where a roomful of people decided that was a good idea.

 

[Maurice Picarda]

A roomful of people including Seumas Milne and Andrew Fisher and James Meadway? You can't imagine that?

 

[ItWillNeverWork]

What happens when you pay attention to what the media say about you is you become a Chuka or a Liz. I'm just happy some human beings are sitting on the opposition benches, as opposed to an army of vaguely-humanoid automatons.

 

[Brainaddict]

What happens when you pay attention to what the media say about you is you become a Chuka or a Liz. I'm just happy some human beings are sitting on the opposition benches, as opposed to an army of vaguely-humanoid automatons.

There's saying what you think, and then there's shooting yourself in the foot. I'm just suggesting they curtail the self-harming.

I think their foreign policy stances are complex to deal with. A lot of their domestic policies are massively popular, but in a country still permeated with imperial delusions, many of their foreign/military policy stances are deeply unpopular (thought there are mixed feelings on intervention in Syria I think). I have to say I sympathised with the comedian on HIGNFY the other night who said: "Just lie Jeremy! Say you'll push the button! Just lie! It's what the Tories do to get in!"

Well, I sympathised, but didn't really agree. I want people in the public eye to be making a lot of the points they are making. But it may be their foreign policy stuff that loses them the election (if they get that far). Which would be sad, when so many of their domestic policies are what so many people want.

 

[killer b]

I thought Mcdonnell's mao dig was pretty good tbh. I'd be interested to see if it has the negative effect people seem to be getting so aerated about - anyone seeing the clip in context will be clear what he was saying, and most news sources do seem to be reporting it in context.

 

[butchersapron]

I think there's an element of FEAR in some people minds that may stem from their lack of faith in the capabilities of people to contextualise things and an overestimation of the ability of some of the media to lead people by the nose.

 

[killer b]

an overestimation of the ability of some of the media to lead people by the nose.

They don't even seem to be trying to, on the whole. It's baffling.

 

[Brainaddict]

I thought Mcdonnell's mao dig was pretty good tbh. I'd be interested to see if it has the negative effect people seem to be getting so aerated about - anyone seeing the clip in context will be clear what he was saying, and most news sources do seem to be reporting it in context.

With a quick google I couldn't even find what Mcdonnel said in any of the top six articles on the issue, nor what he quoted from the book. How can people get context if it isn't even reported?

 

[butchersapron]

They don't even seem to be trying to, on the whole. It's baffling.

Yeah, but they must be and it must be working. That's the sort of model that these types FEAR grows from.

 

[butchersapron]

With a quick google I couldn't even find what Mcdonnel said in any of the top six articles on the issue, nor what he quoted from the book. How can people get context if it isn't even reported?

Well they can understand that he's not a fucking maoist without much effort!

 

[Brainaddict]

They don't even seem to be trying to, on the whole. It's baffling.

You don't think sections of the media are trying to convince people that J&J are secretly authoritarian communists with suspicious internationalist tendencies that will lead them to betray Britain? You must read a different Daily Mail to me.

 

[Pickman's model]

You don't think sections of the media are trying to convince people that J&J are secretly authoritarian communists with suspicious internationalist tendencies that will lead them to betray Britain? You must read a different Daily Mail to me.

i am surprised to find you an avid daily mail reader

 

[butchersapron]

You don't think sections of the media are trying to convince people that J&J are secretly authoritarian communists with suspicious internationalist tendencies that will lead them to betray Britain? You must read a different Daily Mail to me.

See, exactly as i said and exactly on cue.

 

[Pickman's model]

I think their foreign policy stances are complex to deal with. ... many of their foreign/military policy stances are deeply unpopular

are you saying their foreign policy stances unpopular because people don't understand them?

 

[Pickman's model]

Here's some advice for free, Johnny-lad. When you're the shadow chancellor, and your chances of becoming actual chancellor are already quite slim because half the country thinks you're a stinkin' commie, don't go waving Mao's little red book around in parliament, even as a way of insulting the opposition.

It's fine, that's for free. No, don't thank me, just try not to be a fucking idiot.

Do Jez and John have no-one advising them at all? I can't imagine the conversation where a roomful of people decided that was a good idea.

always grand to see you turn on the turbo-patronising.

 

[Brainaddict]

See, exactly as i said and exactly on cue.

We've had this argument before, and my answer is the same as years ago. If advertising is no good at manipulating people, why would corporations spend billions on it? The right wing media attempt similar levels of manipulation, and I've met plenty of people that believe it. That's not the same as saying that everyone is a sheep. Just that across a large population this stuff has an effect - not as must as they might like, for sure, but would you argue it has no effect?

 

[butchersapron]

We've had this argument before, and my answer is the same as years ago. If advertising is no good at manipulating people, why would corporations spend billions on it? The right wing media attempt similar levels of manipulation, and I've met plenty of people that believe it. That's not the same as saying that everyone is a sheep. Just that across a large population this stuff has an effect - not as must as they might like, for sure, but would you argue it has no effect?

The sort of stuff that pretends that the shadow chancellor is a maoist has very little effect. It has most effect on people wringing their hands worrying about the effects it will have on the little people.

 

[killer b]

You don't think sections of the media are trying to convince people that J&J are secretly authoritarian communists with suspicious internationalist tendencies that will lead them to betray Britain? You must read a different Daily Mail to me.

the guardian is trying to, certainly. but most of the articles I've read elsewhere in the press report the context and intent of the use of the quote, if not the full exchange.

 

[hipipol]

one of the areas in which he might struggle is his great association with london and the south-east and not, say, with the shires.

Liverpool in particular eh?

 

[J Ed]

The sort of stuff that pretends that the shadow chancellor is a maoist has very little effect. It has most effect on people wringing their hands worrying about the effects it will have on the little people.

I thought this on reading stuff online yesterday, huge numbers of people talking about how stupid a thing to have done it was because of how it would be decontextualised in the media (interesting that that point of view never accompanied criticisms of the way the media works generally) but no one saying anything like 'oh god we have a Maoist Shadow Chancellor how awful'.

 

[nino_savatte]

With a quick google I couldn't even find what Mcdonnel said in any of the top six articles on the issue, nor what he quoted from the book. How can people get context if it isn't even reported?

You could always have a look at Hansard.

 

[killer b]

Umunna is a poisonous little fuck isn't he? This story isn't about the RW press twisting it, it's about the Judas fucks on their own benches, and the apparent left-leaning Graun.

Chuka Umunna, the former shadow business secretary, said he was not sure why McDonnell had referred to Mao as a joke.

“The last politicians that I quoted, who have inspired me, are Nelson Mandela and Martin Luther King, Keir Hardie – they’re the ones I tend to quote. But that’s my choice. I haven’t quoted a communist before and I have no intention of doing so in the future,” he said.

(a friend pointed out that Mandela was a member of the South African Communist Party, so he got that bit wrong...)