What is wrong with 'Vote Labour without illusions'?

[Sprocket.]

So what? Your post is not a response to mine so I'm not sure why you're quoting it?

So what? I pressed reply instead of like. I blame Henry Weston.

 

[Spanky Longhorn]

So what? I pressed reply instead of like. I blame Henry Weston.

A fine purveyor of organic goods

 

[BigTom]

Re the OP, Labour MP, Simon Danzcuk on twitter reacting to Osborne's plans to make people wait a week before they can claim benefits. No illusions = voting for tories if you vote Labour. You a Tory voter? I doubt it. So don't vote Labour.

Waiting 7 days instead of 3 before claiming benefits means people will need to save a weeks wages in case they lose job. Fair enough.

 

[treelover]

Neoliberal Kabuki theatre.

comment on CIf about yesterdays 'debate' on the spending review

 

[treelover]

Re the OP, Labour MP, Simon Danzcuk on twitter reacting to Osborne's plans to make people wait a week before they can claim benefits. No illusions = voting for tories if you vote Labour. You a Tory voter? I doubt it. So don't vote Labour.

worse than Field...

 

[BigTom]

worse than Field...

I shudder to think that's possible

 

[rioted]

Powerful people with lots of money are certainly on top at the moment, but how do they get to have guns "backing them up" if not because they control the state? But this can only be done, in this country, through voting. Which means that they get guns to back them because people vote for parties (including Labour) which accept that they are entitled to their wealth and that the state is there to back up this entitlement. So, while voting might not change things, it does play an important role. Mind you, something might change if we stopped voting for parties that acquiesce in their privileges.

You are confusing the government with the state.

 

[butchersapron]

And the state with capital.

 

[Jean-Luc]

You are confusing the government with the state.

How does capital control the state if not through the government?

 

[JHE]

How does capital control the state if not through the government?

Through:

• the civil service
• the law and the judiciary
• the financial institutions of the City and the 'markets'
• investment or lack of investment, international flows of capital
• the officers of the armed forces
• the police forces
• control of (many) important means of communication and, last but not least...
• ideology

Governments are important and so is Parliament, but the elements of democracy that we have do not outweigh capital's control of the state by the means listed above.

 

[butchersapron]

How does capital control the state if not through the government?

Through economics. I thought your party was supposed to be sort of marxian and all that?

 

[articul8]

Through economics

in every instance, in the last instance...?

 

[butchersapron]

Yes, that's it.

 

[Jean-Luc]

Through:

• the civil service
• the law and the judiciary
• the financial institutions of the City and the 'markets'
• investment or lack of investment, international flows of capital
• the officers of the armed forces
• the police forces
• control of (many) important means of communication and, last but not least...
• ideology

Governments are important and so is Parliament, but the elements of democracy that we have do not outweigh capital's control of the state by the means listed above.

You seem to be putting the crude theory advanced by Ed's dad that the ruling class control the state because the top civil servants, judges, armed forced officers, etc all went to the same school and are members of the same clubs, i.e. because the members of the ruling class personally occupy these posts in the state themselves. Even if this was true, their actions could only be co-ordinated by some sort of conspiracy.

The last two points - control of the means of communications and ideology - back up my position that they control the state because they control the government; which they control because people vote for political parties that accept the capitalist system of which they are the beneficiaries, i.e. their control of the state is indirect, via the government and elections, not direct through a conspitatorial old-boy nertwork.

 

[butchersapron]

Thisn is your argument not his. That you can take democratic control, of the state and so this should be your aim.

 

[JHE]

You seem to be putting the crude theory advanced by Ed's dad that the ruling class control the state because the top civil servants, judges, armed forced officers, etc all went to the same school and are members of the same clubs, i.e. because the members of the ruling class personally occupy these posts in the state themselves. Even if this was true, their actions could only be co-ordinated by some sort of conspiracy.

There does not have to be and there cannot be a grand conspiracy of all sections of the of the ruling class, let alone all individual members of the ruling class. Nor does there have to be for their control to be effective.

 

[Jean-Luc]

There does not have to be and there cannot be a grand conspiracy of all sections of the of the ruling class, let alone all individual members of the ruling class. Nor does there have to be for their control to be effective.

I agree. That's precisely my point. There is no conspiracy. It's all transparent and clear. The capitalist class control the state via the government which emanates from a parliament elected by people who vote for parties that accept capitalism, largely because, as you said, they accept the dominant ideology They do not control it because they are rich and can buy power. The armed forces are not directly responsible to them (as Rioter suggested) but to the government. It's through the government that they exercise control. How else?

 

[treelover]

Why Labour risks a challenge from the left
The dispute in Falkirk with Unite shows the potential for disillusioned Labour supporters running for office under a different banner

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/jul/01/labour-risks-challenge-from-left

Big trouble brewing in the party?, local party suspended, Progress warning about unions.

 

[JHE]

I agree. That's precisely my point. There is no conspiracy. It's all transparent and clear. The capitalist class control the state via the government which emanates from a parliament elected by people who vote for parties that accept capitalism, largely because, as you said, they accept the dominant ideology They do not control it because they are rich and can buy power. The armed forces are not directly responsible to them (as Rioter suggested) but to the government. It's through the government that they exercise control. How else?

By all the means I listed. Your idea that there has to be a grand conspiracy in order for power to be exercised in those ways is mistaken.

 

[Pickman's model]

Through:

• the civil service
• the law and the judiciary
• the financial institutions of the City and the 'markets'
• investment or lack of investment, international flows of capital
• the officers of the armed forces
• the police forces
• control of (many) important means of communication and, last but not least...
• ideology

Governments are important and so is Parliament, but the elements of democracy that we have do not outweigh capital's control of the state by the means listed above.

You missed out 'habit'

 

[Jean-Luc]

By all the means I listed. Your idea that there has to be a grand conspiracy in order for the power to be exercised in those ways is mistaken.

OK, but how (apart from ideology) is it exercised in these ways, through the civil service and officers of the armed forces for instance, independently of the government?

 

[Ibn Khaldoun]

By the way, that the doctrine of the lesser evil should apply to elections [in which one may abstain his vote] is highly controversial among Islamic scholars, although some have argued for it doing so.

 

[redsquirrel]

Big trouble brewing in the party?,

Do you really think so?

It's meaningless on a national level.

 

[stowpirate]

Don't you think Labour has more to do with marketing now than Politics? I have a feeling Labour have one goal and that is to get into power and sod everyhing else? So that everything that damages the brand is avoided in that quest to appeal to all? Albeit that policy appears to have gone off the rails as they look more Tory as the days pass

 

[butchersapron]

By the way, that the doctrine of the lesser evil should apply to elections [in which one may abstain his vote] is highly controversial among Islamic scholars, although some have argued for it doing so.

So what? Nice sexist c&ping too.

 

[Ibn Khaldoun]

no-one had pointed this out yet

 

[gosub]

It's alright to says things can only get better. You haven't lost your brand new sweater!