Why Labour are Scum

[ViolentPanda]

Indeed, and what does it say of socialism and socialists if the best they can propose to people is that they try and the same bunch of criminals in just with different ties? Is that going to win people over to socialist ideas as an alternative to what we have now or are they going to correctly note that these socialists are shilling for the people who are fucking them over and go and vote for UKIP?

IMO if you tout "vote Labour without illusions" and/or buy into the idea that the Labour Party can be changed from inside/through entryism, then you're not a socialist of any kind. All you are is a useful idiot for neoliberals.

 

[SpookyFrank]

Beachy Head is more effective. Most of the legendary white cliffs are fenced off 20-30m from the cliff edge, because of erosion problems.

Make you you have 'Love Reign O'er Me' by the Who playing in your headphones when you jump.

 

[ViolentPanda]

Voting Labour= voting Labour
Voting Tory = voting Tory.

I don't accept they are exactly identical. You can keep your tinfoil hat.

No-one has said they're "exactly identical".
However, many people (including myself) have told you that politically and economically, they are interchangeable. Whoever governs, they will shit the same shit onto the mass of the population of the UK.

 

[ViolentPanda]

But by not voting you are actively voting them in. That's the problem. The system doesn't reognise a no vote. At best you have ahung parliament which is no better.

I think you need to read Bagehot's "The English Constitution", and then any of the dozens of constitutional commentaries from the 20th century (I recommend Bogdanor). Scrutiny of any of these will apprise you of the fact that governance is by consent. A vote is taken as consent. Not voting is a sign that consent is not being given.

 

[ViolentPanda]

BTW has anyone actually looked much into what Labour Left groups like the LRC are actually about? These people are my favourites, they simultaneously support Ed Miliband and Kim Jong-Un. Labour is happy to let people like that carry bags for them cos they know that they can have fuck all influence in the party, THAT is what they think about people trying to reclaim the party and they are right. That is how relaxed they are but good luck with your harmful fool's errand.

The NCP? Don't they own a load of car parks?

 

[agricola]

I think you need to read Bagehot's "The English Constitution", and then any of the dozens of constitutional commentaries from the 20th century (I recommend Bogdanor). Scrutiny of any of these will apprise you of the fact that governance is by consent. A vote is taken as consent. Not voting is a sign that consent is not being given.

I suppose the only problem with that is how openly some of the (especially) Blairite crowd revelled in living in a post-democratic age; its a bit much to think that they would all toodle off just because noone voted for them.

 

[ViolentPanda]

Make you you have 'Love Reign O'er Me' by the Who playing in your headphones when you jump.

Don't you have to be riding a Lambretta to pull that one off properly, though?

 

[SpookyFrank]

Don't you have to be riding a Lambretta to pull that one off properly, though?

I rather thought that went without saying.

 

[ViolentPanda]

I suppose the only problem with that is how openly some of the (especially) Blairite crowd revelled in living in a post-democratic age; its a bit much to think that they would all toodle off just because noone voted for them.

I don't expect them to toodle off.
I do expect that media pressure (even if it comes from outside or below, rather than the mainstream media) to at least force a debate (not by "them", by "us") on the legitimacy of their governance. I also expect that the display of contempt by the elites for the electoral process that would be inherent in taking a mandate from a minimal vote (note I say "minimal", not "minority", as we're already in "elected by a minority" territory) would kick general dissent up a gear for some, from apathy to obstruction.

 

[ViolentPanda]

I rather thought that went without saying.

If only it were preceded by the killing of the bellboy, I'd be a happy panda, no longer having to ask "Sting, where is thy death?".

 

[ViolentPanda]

Exactly. I'm moderate enough to be swayed by Labour policy if it goes anywhere near socialist territory. They can't even offer the most basic things to the soft-left electorate. Put the utilities in public hands? NO. Renationalise a few choo-choos? NO. Promise to make sure poor people are provided with a decent basic income and stuck up for in the media? NO.

I'm so mild I bet they could buy me off by just doing the above if it got the Tories out, but today's Labour can't do even the most gentle bit of socialism. They're cunts. They're shit. They stand for nothing. What is Labour party policy? It's not even coherent. It's an amorphous blob of fear and cowardice.

They can't/won't even promise to repeal any anti-union legislation the coalition push through before May 2015.

 

[ViolentPanda]

... and the 'Awesome Wells' paradox if you don't vote for a cunt you'll get an even bigger one.

That'd only be paradoxical in a "steady state" universe. In an expanding universe, the infinite expansion of cuntitude is not only possible, but natural.

 

[ViolentPanda]

The Guardian are going to write so many articles about Podemos no-one will like them for long. Owen Jones in a Podemos t-shirt in February 2015 will be the last straw.

Owen doesn't "do" tees. He wears his workers' blue shirt at all times.

 

[stuff_it]

You're having a fucking laugh. Just how do you propose that the working class take the party back? Go on, I'm all ears...

Does it involve flaming torches and pitchforks? Just that if it does I need to keep an eye on the price of oil.

Would rope and a hammer do in a pinch or would I be the only one without a flaming torch?

 

[Monkeygrinder's Organ]

Owen doesn't "do" tees. He wears his workers' blue shirt at all times.

Probably in order to just about look like an adult.

 

[Pickman's model]

Beachy Head is more effective. Most of the legendary white cliffs are fenced off 20-30m from the cliff edge, because of erosion problems.

does it matter? i'm hiring 50 deckchairs for the day after the election so people can watch auld 'beau' fly

 

[Libertad]

If only it were preceded by the killing of the bellboy, I'd be a happy panda, no longer having to ask "Sting, where is thy death?".

Very good indeed citizen.

 

[stuff_it]

Bearing in mind the party composition of Scottish MPs and the impending referendum I'm not sure that the long term direction of the Labour Party is something that will affect any of us here in England.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_MPs_for_constituencies_in_Scotland_2010–

 

[ViolentPanda]

If the Tories get in again say bye, bye to the welfare state, goodnight to unemployment money, goodbye to the NHS and all the rest. 100x worse then labour.

Your argument only has validity if you can prove that Labour have no intention of doing the same.
Given that they're as committed as the coalition to, for example, TTIP (TransAtlantic Trade and Investment Partnership), their committment to doing much the same as the coalition has been signalled to anyone with a pair of eyes in their head, and the ability to read.
All the prior protections of the public sector from "the market" (i.e. rapacious capitalists looking to asset strip) will be gone, under Labour as under the coalition. Social security? That'll be gone to, as a system of insurance (with a commercial company, naturally) garnished with charitable provision for the povs is expanded from its' current function (optional) to being the over-arching model.

 

[ViolentPanda]

It's just an attempt by the Tories to be seen to be hard on benefit fraud. Labour will probably beat them to the punch. The chance for them to show the deserving poor how hard they are on 'junkies' and 'lazy folk' (or, rather, the sick and unemployed) will be too juicy too miss.

Yep, good old Labour who visited the so-called "Benefits Integrity Project" on disabled people, a decade before Iain Dunked-in Shit was sicced on us by Cameron. Labour tend to forget how many suicides, hunger strikes etc accompanied that clusterfuck of a "probe" into fraudulent claims, and how few cases of fraud it actually turned up.

 

[ViolentPanda]

subconsciously you are a fucking Tory.

Consciously, you're wilfully-ignorant.

 

[Doctor Carrot]

You obviously have never lived in the real world.

Don't think you would be saying that if trying to scrape by signing on, doing the odd boot sale to make ends meet and potentially facing a long jail sentence if caught. That's the reality for many people.

Your reality is pontificating with mock disdain.

Ah I see you edited. I am trying to scrape by signing on you fucking idiot. It doesn't change the fact that you're completely and utterly clueless.

See in reality I'm exactly the sort of person you're trying to reach with your 'vote labour they'll be better' and yet I, and no doubt many others who don't have their head up their arse, completely disagree with you. Have a think about why that might be the case instead of accusing people like me of being smug know it alls. Have a look at all the post on the atos thread, a great many people there will disagree with you too, again have a think why that might be.

For Labour to get me to even vaguely entertain the idea of voting for them for 3 seconds they would have to abolish all age limits for single occupancy in housing benefit, not gonna happen, they would have to increase public spending and wrest control of social provision back from the third sector so my degree actually gets some value again, not gonna happen. Those are just two things that would suit me, my personal circumstances but seeing as Labour actually brought these things in there's no chance them reversing it. That's just my personal circumstances, there's a whole host of other things they brought in that harm people who aren't me, things like ESA, blowing up brown people abroad, PFIs and so on. Why the fuck would I vote for any of this?

 

[ViolentPanda]

I see them taking apart the NHS piece by piece, sanctioning JSA claimants for bugger all, promoting workfare, creating more obstacles to ESA claims. Basically intensifying the agenda they have already been following. Why are they following this agenda if it is what protects them?

Put simply: Because there's a tension between what neoliberalism demands, and what you might call the "Bread and Circuses" limit. Neoliberalism demands complete submission to "the market", but political realities demand that some minimum provision is made in order to prevent mass physical dissent, so they give us just enough bread, and enough circuses, to keep us cowed but not starving, and enough entertainment to keep our thoughts away from dissent. Fall below that limit of provision (as neoliberalism demands) and you get exactly what the Romans got - bread riots.

 

[Plumdaff]

But by not voting you are actively voting them in. That's the problem. The system doesn't reognise a no vote. At best you have ahung parliament which is no better.

Not voting does at least show them up for the hypocritical bastards they are when they try to set minimum quotas for trade union ballots.

 

[ViolentPanda]

Probably in order to just about look like an adult.

Good point. Mind you, a white shirt would make him look like he'd just taken his school tie off.

 

[ViolentPanda]

Does it involve flaming torches and pitchforks? Just that if it does I need to keep an eye on the price of oil.

Would rope and a hammer do in a pinch or would I be the only one without a flaming torch?

Whichever tools the workers choose to use, will do!

 

[treelover]

Put simply: Because there's a tension between what neoliberalism demands, and what you might call the "Bread and Circuses" limit. Neoliberalism demands complete submission to "the market", but political realities demand that some minimum provision is made in order to prevent mass physical dissent, so they give us just enough bread, and enough circuses, to keep us cowed but not starving, and enough entertainment to keep our thoughts away from dissent. Fall below that limit of provision (as neoliberalism demands) and you get exactly what the Romans got - bread riots.

In the U.K. can't see it, Wonga and Foodbanks will keep them at bay

and punitive sentences, such as three months for a bottle of water.

 

[DotCommunist]

they can't maintain the current prison levels let alone start actually going through with the increasingly draconian bullshit grayling wank fantasies.

not building any more nicks are they?

 

[stuff_it]

they can't maintain the current prison levels let alone start actually going through with the increasingly draconian bullshit grayling wank fantasies.

not building any more nicks are they?

Nope, they're "modernising". Room for expansion and an increase in prison places is just a side effect, as are the expected PFI profits...

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/modernisation-of-the-prison-estate

 

[Pickman's model]

There is not going to be a Tory majority. It's nigh on impossible.

it'd almost be worth a tory majority to see 'beau' wells face as he got astride his scooter to re-enact the end of quadrophenia, only on his case it'd be quadro-phonier.

first time as tragedy...

second time as farce!