The Slow Fix - IWCA on the rise of UKIP and decline of the left...

[sihhi]

Mark Seddon, former editor of New Statesman, described the result as 'alarming - like a Poujadist coup'. Which may for some be over the top for some, but where, with the benefit of hindsight do you sit now?

Seddon was a contributor to the New Statesman, but never its editor. He did edit the Labour-til-we-die Labour Left weekly Tribune, wanted to be a Labour MP which might explain his histrionics over a 'coup'.

 

[cesare]

I think what the IWCA has said on the matter is extremely circumspect: ie the free movement of labour is at the behest of the free movement of capital. End of.

Let Capital determine?

 

[bignose1]

Not at all I will be watching Chelsea play united at Stamford bridge north tomorrow .

Drop round before...

 

[The39thStep]

You'll be in Lahndahn!

Fraid not. Stamford Bridge North is a euphemism for Old Trafford, which is in a suburb of Manchester,

 

[bignose1]

Fraid not. Stamford Bridge North is a euphemism for Old Trafford, which is in a suburb of Manchester,

Not that old one..youll be doing airplanes next..!

 

[The39thStep]

Not that old one..youll be doing airplanes next..!

I have never done airplanes in the same way you don't do helicopters

 

[cesare]

Fraid not. Stamford Bridge North is a euphemism for Old Trafford, which is in a suburb of Manchester,

Oh!

 

[bignose1]

I have never done airplanes in the same way you don't do helicopters

Not comparable...

...and I thought it was a reference to Chopper Harris

 

[articul8]

Mark Seddon, former editor of New Statesman,

Tribune not NS

described the result as 'alarming - like a Poujadist coup'. Which may for some be over the top for some, but where, with the benefit of hindsight do you sit now?

I'm not particularly staggered by their gains. I'd be very surprised to see them sustain this level of support or anything like it into a General Election - although I fully expect them to top the poll in the Euros next year.
Obviously if UKIP begins to develop serious organisational roots at local level then it becomes a different prospect. It doesn't follow they will though.

What's more alarming is the potential for the main parties to respond by a sharp turn to the right - esp on immigration.

 

[Smokeandsteam]

What's more alarming is the potential for the main parties to respond by a sharp turn to the right - esp on immigration.

What's even more alarming is your failure (refusal) to accept the wider point - the yawning gap in political representation. Eventually it will be filled - perhaps by UKIP perhaps not. But definitely not by Labour, whether it tacks an inch to the right or the left.

 

[articul8]

What's even more alarming is your failure (refusal) to accept the wider point - the yawning gap in political representation. Eventually it will be filled - perhaps by UKIP perhaps not. But definitely not by Labour, whether it tacks an inch to the right or the left.

I accept there is a vacuum of political representation, created by the Blairite takeover of the Labour party, and we're still in the post-New Labour period where the scale and extent of this disenfrachisement hasn't yet sunk in at the leadership level. Yes, there's no amount of spin or minor recalibration of policy positions that can address it - it needs fundamental change. But I don't see that as totally impossible - even the self-interest of Labour politicians lies in avoiding a PASOK style meltdown.

 

[Joe Reilly]

Let Capital determine?

'Capital does determine' which is why the pitch regarding Open Borders is open to the accusation of being both sentimental and reactionary.

 

[Limerick Red]

'Capital does determine' which is why the pitch regarding Open Borders is open to the accusation of being both sentimental and reactionary.

while this is undeniably true, how is this countered, i.e. more times than I can remember, in pubs, doing stalls, etc people who aren't racist, some aren't white, but are genuinely concerned about immigration. This is a genuine question as I'm usually stumped for an answer, (revolution not being on the cards), we can state the bleeding obvious that the last people to ever going to do anything in regards to immigration are the right wing parties, as these are the ones reaping the benefits of an under payed, mobile work force in a buyers market, and UKIP regardless of their rhetoric are a further extension of this, so now you may or may not of convinced joe soap not to vote Tory, or UKIP, but what now?

Is voting Labor the best that can be offered, (not in the grand scheme of things, but to the bloke, your talking to there and then) ?

 

[sihhi]

while this is undeniably true, how is this countered, i.e. more times than I can remember, in pubs, doing stalls, etc people who aren't racist, some aren't white, but are genuinely concerned about immigration. This is a genuine question as I'm usually stumped for an answer, (revolution not being on the cards), we can state the bleeding obvious that the last people to ever going to do anything in regards to immigration are the right wing parties, as these are the ones reaping the benefits of an under payed, mobile work force in a buyers market, and UKIP regardless of their rhetoric are a further extension of this, so now you may or may not of convinced joe soap not to vote Tory, or UKIP, but what now?

Is voting Labor the best that can be offered, (not in the grand scheme of things, but to the bloke, your talking to there and then) ?

My experiences have been that - for those wanting to make it an issue - 80% of the time it's those who've given up the possibility of defending collective rights at all - and hence focusing on it as the only permissible explanation.

Requesting a UKIP supporter or a w/c Tory vote Labour is unlikely to work, might possibly be counterproductive. Expect nothing good from Labour for the w/c, whether immigrant or non-immigrant.

If do you want to argue just on immigration, you can argue the case for the repatriation of around 900,000 Scots who live in England - these people 'block' (do English people out of work) much higher-paying jobs than the jobs of Poles, Somalis and Lithuanians hence they should be the priority for removal from England.
It might make someone reconsider their views or turn them into ultra-purist zealot.
In which case mount an aggressive case for restrictions on movement modelled on those from the pre-Victorian era with immigration/settlement controls/border sheriffs defending every parish.

 

[belboid]

'Capital does determine' which is why the pitch regarding Open Borders is open to the accusation of being both sentimental and reactionary.

whereas your pitch [We are pro-working class; the free movement of capital is pro-ruling class. Draw your own conclusions as to what our policy would be] leaves you open to the accusation of being reactionary and patronising. Not sure which is better, or worse.

 

[Joe Reilly]

whereas your pitch [We are pro-working class; the free movement of capital is pro-ruling class. Draw your own conclusions as to what our policy would be] leaves you open to the accusation of being reactionary and patronising. Not sure which is better, or worse.

The 'like' from Ayatollah strongly suggest any attempt at a sensible response superflous. All that's on offer is the routine tissue shredding ad hominem (who is being 'patronised' for example?) response.

 

[belboid]

The 'like' from Ayatollah makes any any attempt sensible response superflous. All that's on offer is the routine tissue shredding ad hominem (who is being 'patronised' for example?) response.

wow, that's the worst attempt at an answer you've come out with yet. I might as well say all the posts you've had with likes from treelover prove them to be worthless, but that would be an ad hominem. (do you actually know what that means? if so, why dont you use it appropriately).

Give it another go, there's a good lad.

 

[Joe Reilly]

My experiences have been that - for those wanting to make it an issue - 80% of the time it's those who've given up the possibility of defending collective rights at all - and hence focusing on it as the only permissible explanation.

I think there's a lot of truth in that. When people have politically given up, immigration can become the catch-all symbol of their disaffection with democracy itself.

 

[The39thStep]

I think there's a lot of truth in that. When people have politically given up, immigration can become the catch-all symbol of their disaffection with democracy itself.

Keenan Malik made a similar point recently about the impact when people no longer believe that social change is possible through collective action and stop asking what sort of society we want. he argues that instead the question becomes 'who am/who are we' and retreats into culture/race and identity.

 

[Joe Reilly]

Keenan Malik made a similar point recently about the impact when people no longer believe that social change is possible through collective action and stop asking what sort of society we want. he argues that instead the question becomes 'who am/who are we' and retreats into culture/race and identity.

Exactly, if 'working class' ceases to have any meaning politically then is it inevitable people will retreat into or be attracted toward other description of themselves.

 

[articul8]

Isn't the question of what society we want already bound up with the question of who we are (and therefore by extension [edit] who each of us are)?

 

[nino_savatte]

I think there's a lot of truth in that. When people have politically given up, immigration can become the catch-all symbol of their disaffection with democracy itself.

Conversely, immigrants become the scapegoats for economic failures at times like these. Funny how they've all hopped on board the anti-immigration bandwagon. No?

 

[Pickman's model]

Isn't the question of what society we want already bound up with the question of who we are (and therefore by extension who I am)?

we know who you are and because we know what party you belong to we know you're by no means wholly dismayed by the turn of events which could see your party in power for a generation.

 

[articul8]

^ This the point on several levels - not least because I don't think this situation will last.

 

[Joe Reilly]

Conversely, immigrants become the scapegoats for economic failures at times like these. Funny how they've all hopped on board the anti-immigration bandwagon. No?

Not entirely sure what you mean. Expand.

 

[nino_savatte]

Not entirely sure what you mean. Expand.

I take it from your reply that you don't believe immigrants are being scapegoated for the current state of the economy (along with the disabled, benefit claimants and so on).

 

[Joe Reilly]

I take it from your reply that you don't believe immigrants are being scapegoated for the current state of the economy (along with the disabled, benefit claimants and so on).

while this is undeniably true, how is this countered, i.e. more times than I can remember, in pubs, doing stalls, etc people who aren't racist, some aren't white, but are genuinely concerned about immigration. This is a genuine question as I'm usually stumped for an answer, (revolution not being on the cards), we can state the bleeding obvious that the last people to ever going to do anything in regards to immigration are the right wing parties, as these are the ones reaping the benefits of an under payed, mobile work force in a buyers market, and UKIP regardless of their rhetoric are a further extension of this, so now you may or may not of convinced joe soap not to vote Tory, or UKIP, but what now?

Is voting Labor the best that can be offered, (not in the grand scheme of things, but to the bloke, your talking to there and then) ?

The easy answer - is that there is no easy answer.

 

[Joe Reilly]

wow, that's the worst attempt at an answer you've come out with yet. I might as well say all the posts you've had with likes from treelover prove them to be worthless, but that would be an ad hominem. (do you actually know what that means? if so, why dont you use it appropriately).

Give it another go, there's a good lad.

Taken as whole, your weasely contribution on this thread easily meets the dictionary definition.
Typically, when all the bluff and bluster is separated out, you actually have nothing to say.

 

[Joe Reilly]

I take it from your reply that you don't believe immigrants are being scapegoated for the current state of the economy (along with the disabled, benefit claimants and so on).

I'm going to ignore this as it bears no relation to what I posted. Cheers.

 

[nino_savatte]

I'm going to ignore this as it bears no relation to what I posted. Cheers.

You can do what you like, however it's rather revealing that you choose to ignore it.

But it's the way you feign ignorance that gets me.

Not entirely sure what you mean. Expand.