Rachel Reeves does not just have a copy editor. She also has a copy copy editor.'mistakes'
Rachel Reeves says she 'should have done better' amid plagiarism row
Labour's shadow chancellor admits some sections of her new book "were not properly referenced".www.bbc.co.uk
Or, you know, if you can't write a book, don't.
I don't see the big deal. There's nothing new on this earth. We all plagiarise all the time.
I mean, plagiarism's not a criminal offence, so she shouldn't have been banged up for it like that.
She's been put in the naughty corner
Moby lyric right there!I don't see the big deal. There's nothing new on this earth. We all plagiarise all the time.
Dreaming of her future role as Witchfinder General at the DWP.
From that article...View attachment 432153
Football, faith and Fabianism: what books by the new frontbenchers tell us about the way Labour will govern
Ed Miliband’s ideas are more radical than his party’s; Emily Thornberry is alarmed by Trump; Rachel Reeves has an unlikely role model. What else do the new cabinet’s tomes reveal?www.theguardian.com
I laughed out loud at the section on what she (Reeves) learned from Rosa Luxemburg: that there should be a windfall tax on big oil and gas companies, and the tax loopholes used by non-doms and private equity should be closed. The Spartacist wouldn’t disagree with any of that but I’m not sure, when she said on the brink of death – “Tomorrow the revolution will rise up again, clashing its weapons and to your horror it will proclaim with trumpets blazing: I was, I am, I shall be!” – that she had tax on her mind.
There is a hopelessly confused section on populism, in which Podemos, a grassroots Spanish leftwing movement defined and set apart by its pluralism, is bagged together with the far right’s Marine Le Pen (because people like them?); and Jeremy Corbyn is a populist because he said “the media can be a little biased”, while the Daily Mail is populist because it called judges “enemies of the people”.
It’s an anthology of speeches, each with a short introduction, and it is politically anodyne, celebrating Thatcher for “self-belief and determination” (shame about the neoliberalism), and May for being “brave” (shame about the hostile environment).