Rochester & Strood by-election

[butchersapron]

I mean literally money.

Then this press conference is over.

 

[articul8]

When you say money, you literally just mean money rather than than the series of use-values that produce and reproduce us right?

How are we to understand the interrelation between the two? How does the money supply relate the overall production of value?

 

[butchersapron]

How are we to understand the interrelation between the two? How does the money supply relate the overall production of value?

Fuck off.

 

[articul8]

He doesn't like being asked questions.

 

[ViolentPanda]

It's funny how so-called "anarchists" are some of the most herd-minded, comformist group-thinkers out-there. It's how these boards work. People are gobby and dismissive in inverse proportion to their ability to contribute anything worthwhile of their own.

The above is why so many posters in P & P, regardless of their political positioning, think you have all the political acumen of a glass of Warninks' Advocaat mixed with piss.

 

[ViolentPanda]

Have you missed the whole post-2010 thing? I get that it's boring but he has urged people to vote and join labour because they will disappointed and then force their way through to a new formation. I'm not making this up.

He also argues that labour are the only hope and that it's possible to change labour.

None of this is made up. It sounds like it is i know.

"We" can supposedly change Labour from the inside, even though from Kinnock-onward, the party hierarchs removed every single mechanism by which grass roots pressure could be brought to bear. That he still preaches what he does despite those pesky facts point him up as either dishonest, or so stunningly naive that I believe that I have a bridge I can sell him...

 

[ViolentPanda]

'Slow the pace and deflect the attacks from the working poor to some extent.' Bit of a slip mate. "On the working poor" is what you meant.

Unsurprising that Labour see "efficiency savings" in persecuting the non-working poor, just like the cuntalition do. The added bonnus being they can frighten some of us into suicide.

 

[ViolentPanda]

No, there is more scope for build in pressure on/in/against Labour than the Tories as there's a sense that we would expect no less from Tories. Whilst people don't expect much from Labour they may get even less in the current context. The straw that breaks the camels back?

There's no scope. Name me one party mechanism by which members or the electorate can exercise pressure against the party!
We both know that all we ("the people") have is our vote, and that you and your ilk will say anything, claim anything, in order to secure power.
You're a disgustingly dishonest shitcunt.

 

[ViolentPanda]

That back that was about to break in 79, 83,87, 92,97, 2001,2005,2010.

The same madness that the far-right have about the tories splitting and reconstituting around them.

And you know what, it's the same trot drivel you now condemn that you used to parrot quite freely.

From Trot to "Fear not! Labour will save you!".

 

[articul8]

"Labour will save you" - where have I ever uttered anything like that?

 

[ViolentPanda]

This truly is the thread that keeps on giving in a car crash kind of a way.

It's kind of beautiful in its' awfulness.

 

[ViolentPanda]

I will be campaigning for the election of a Labour government whilst at the same time (since I am not the leadership) arguing that to fulfil the needs of working class communities it will have to break from austerity. If Labour loses, or fails to win a majority there will be some serious choices ahead. If it wins, future battles will be inevitable.

And those "serious choices" will not revolve around fulfilling the needs of working class communities, they will revolve (as has become usual) around the desires of a narrow section of the electorate characterised as "swing voters in marginal constituencies".
As for "breaking from austerity", Balls' rhetoric about matching Cuntalition spending plans ensures, along with the massive extra borrowing Osborne has constructed, that "austerity" can't be broken from, even if radically-redistributive tax legislation is enacted.

 

[ViolentPanda]

It's present position is an uneasy compromise between Blairites who genuinely want to further the neoliberal restructing of the economy and society and want to use austerity to do that, and people with genuine links to the labour movement who want to advance the living standards of their communities. This tension will only be exacerbated by the experience of government. I'm not saying there's anything automatic, or even likely, about the side of the angels winning out. But it's a battle that will be fought out, and even marginal gains if that's all that comes out of it are better than nothing.

The only way the above works is if you take union sponsorship to mean " people with genuine links to the labour movement who want to advance the living standards of their communities". Any other way, it falls down.

 

[ViolentPanda]

"Labour will save you" - where have I ever uttered anything like that?

What is any of your "vote Labour without illusions" bullshit if it isn't "Labour will save you", you muppet? You promise "something better" in return for people voting your party into power. At this juncture many people want to be saved from the Tories. Do the exceedingly-simple maths.

 

[Wilf]

articul8 I was a kind of Bennite 30 years ago (never really a Bennite, always knew he was a daft bastard, but the label will do). Looking back, I cringe about the assumptions I and that politics carried around - assumptions about class and the party, the 'resolutionary' nature of the politics, the general shitness of the whole thing. Not only was it shit, it hoovered up lots of people who might otherwise have done something effective, might have been creative, all the obvious stuff. You choose to repeat all those mistakes in the most unlikely circumstances, circumstances where there has been 30 years of evidence that your chosen vessel, Labour, is a key agent of neo-liberalism. I've no real interest in abusing you, I'm just astonished that anyone could be so naive. It really is an absurd politics, even if it does seem to be a rationalistion of your own position as a player in the whole thing.

 

[articul8]

Interesting that I'm being attacked as BOTH utterly naive AND incredibly cynical. Actually my expectations of what electing a Labour government will *in itself* achieve are pretty low (moving from austerity to austerity-lite). But at the same time with a small or non-existent majority an informal coalition of left labour, greens and SNP could exert some influence in a positive direction.

 

[butchersapron]

Interesting that I'm being attacked as BOTH utterly naive AND incredibly cynical. Actually my expectations of what electing a Labour government will *in itself* achieve are pretty low (moving from austerity to austerity-lite). But at the same time with a small or non-existent majority an informal coalition of left labour, greens and SNP could exert some influence in a positive direction.

But i thought labour would be forced to be shit and thus provoke a mass leave-ation or become really good. Can't you remember your own schemes? You were bigging them up only yesterday. But they're not your schemes - they're the schemes of ted grant 50 years ago. They the mad dream of leon trotsky seeing mass class parties split asunder in the 1917-21 period and then projected onto the future. The 100 years inbetween don't count.

 

[butchersapron]

Interesting that I'm being attacked as BOTH utterly naive AND incredibly cynical. Actually my expectations of what electing a Labour government will *in itself* achieve are pretty low (moving from austerity to austerity-lite). But at the same time with a small or non-existent majority an informal coalition of left labour, greens and SNP could exert some influence in a positive direction.

Interesting in the sense of being accurate and getting closer to the powerful boys.

 

[Wilf]

Interesting that I'm being attacked as BOTH utterly naive AND incredibly cynical. Actually my expectations of what electing a Labour government will *in itself* achieve are pretty low (moving from austerity to austerity-lite). But at the same time with a small or non-existent majority an informal coalition of left labour, greens and SNP could exert some influence in a positive direction.

Maybe you manage to combine the 2. Just been a sanctions demo in Middlesbrough - austerity, lite or otherwise. You'll be carrying on with austerity and sanctions after 2015 if you win - not them, YOU. You'll posture against it, you might even do the odd demo yourself - but who will you be demonstrating against? You're like an anti-monarchy campaigner, spending your time and energy bringing charles to the throne ..... because you know he'll be shit.

 

[Wilf]

To be honest, this does feel a bit like the days of challenging jazzz.

 

[butchersapron]

To be honest, this does feel a bit like the days of challenging jazzz.

Spoiler: challenigng jazz

 

[articul8]

Maybe you manage to combine the 2. Just been a sanctions demo in Middlesbrough - austerity, lite or otherwise. You'll be carrying on with austerity and sanctions after 2015 if you win - not them, YOU. You'll posture against it, you might even do the odd demo yourself - but who will you be demonstrating against? You're like an anti-monarchy campaigner, spending your time and energy bringing charles to the throne ..... because you know he'll be shit.

It won't be me. I will be opposing sanctions, and have already attacked them in print, including when they were being introduced by Purnell.

 

[Wilf]

It won't be me. I will be opposing sanctions, and have already attacked them in print, including when they were being introduced by Purnell.

What % of your subs did you withhold?

 

[Pickman's model]

What % of your subs did you withhold?

i bet it's 0%.

 

[Wilf]

'Here, have my money - but don't spend it on anything I wouldn't approve of"

 

[Pickman's model]

'Here, have my money - but don't spend it on anything I wouldn't approve of"

i think his position is more a case of "here, have my money"

 

[Wilf]

i think his position is more a case of "here, have my money"

'Here Ed, take my soul - I like you 6% better than Purnell. However, I do reserve the right to not like you when you do all the things you've said you will do'

 

[Pickman's model]

'Here Ed, take my soul - I like you 6% better than Purnell. However, I do reserve the right to not like you when you do all the things you've said you will do'

 

[Mr Moose]

In a massive victory for the forces of anti-snobbery Ed appoints a Lord, Lord Bach, as Shadow Attorney General. Hooray!

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-30310735

 

[Wilf]

In a massive victory for the forces of anti-snobbery Ed appoints a Lord, Lord Bach, as Shadow Attorney General. Hooray!

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-30310735

I almost didn't need to go to wiki, but yes... westminster school, oxford, the bar, head of chambers, house of lords... he's probably got enough connections to be excused chairing the nonce inquiry.