what a dick

Ouch. That like really hurts my feelings, man.

[video]https://youtu.be/EuJzSTNDUGI[/video]

you have no feelings as clearly evidenced by your choice of footwear

I think if JC, or OS, managed to get Daesh around a table and to call a truce I would be impressed and might change my viewpoint about his idea of world peace.

I would contribute to funding his trip out to the middle east to see them, and also any funeral arrangements.

Imagine if a corbyn supporter had said this about a Jew or a lady?

he is breathtakingly naïve

I keep reading this and it’s an incredibly lazy, patronising and pessimistic argument. Naive about what exactly? That international problems can’t be solved without killing thousands of people and laying waste to whole countries? That social problems like poverty, crime, exploitation and hopelessness can’t be tackled? That the status quo can’t be challenged? This is exactly what the labour party was setup to do. If it’s naive to think any of this then maybe that explains why the labour party establishment is having such trouble resisting Corbyn and his followers.

Of course I would prefer world peace but i’m not naïve enough to think it can be achieved

I thought I was pretty far along the scale of nihilistic cynicism so thanks for re-adjusting my boundaries.

This is exactly what the labour party was setup to do

Given that the Labour Party won six general elections prior to Blair, and never managed to achieve any of those laudible goals, don’t you think that a belief that Jeremy can succeed in doing so is somewhat naive?

1 “I would want to avoid us getting involved militarily. I want to achieve a world in which we don’t need to go to war.”

2 “My view is that, ultimately, all solutions to these international crises do come about through dialogue, so eventually if we are to try to solve this all of the actors do need to be involved. But at the moment Isil are clearly not interested in negotiating. At some point for us to resolve this, we will need to get people round the table.”
[/b]

Two quotes from two people. One quote caused outrage the other one was brushed under the carpet.

It’s impossible to know which quote caused the outrage without knowing which quote is attributed to who.

But here’s a clue. Suggesting dialogue with Putin is tantamount to treason whilst suggesting dialogue with ISIS is well, you know……sometimes you need to talk to people you don’t really like.

Given that the Labour Party won six general elections prior to Blair, and never managed to achieve any of those laudible goals

In ninfan land the beveridge report never happened and was certainly not implemented.

beveridge report never happened and was certainly not implemented.

No, it was never fully implemented, I agree (flat rate contributions for example)

Just think, when they planned the NHS, they thought that it would get smaller as people got healthier 🙂

ninfan – Member

Just think, when they planned the NHS, they thought that it would get smaller as people got healthier

They didn’t.

“We shall never have all we need. Expectations will always exceed capacity. The service must always be changing, growing and improving – it must always appear inadequate” [/b]

– Nye Bevan, Labour Health Minister, June 1948 (2 weeks before the NHS was founded)

Churchill’s commitment to creating a welfare state was limited and he and the Conservative Party opposed much of the implementation of the Beveridge Report, including voting against the founding of the NHS.[8]

The Labour Party won the 1945 general election on a platform that promised to address what the Beveridge report called “the five giant evils” of society: Want, Disease, Ignorance, Squalor, and Idleness.So labour did it in the face of tory opposition I think this is false

never managed to achieve any of those laudible goals

@ yunki – who exactly are the ‘real working class’- I don’t even know what that phrase means. I know lots of people who work hard for a living and aspire to improve their lot in life and I come across lots who can’t be arsed. I also come across lots who would like to be able to get to the former position but need a helping hand to so (I would count myself in that last group in terms of being able to get easy access to tertiary education as a mature student). I didn’t think of myself as a member of any particular class before hand or since. I do see a class people who are happy to be ignorant and wear their ignorance as some badge of honour – is that the ‘real working class’?

@ dazh – as I mentioned above, my contempt for JC and his ilk are that they allowed Thatcher free reign and to transform society to what it is today. To think you can unpick that is naïve because its not what people want – it would be like pretending something like the enlightenment didn’t happen (not that i’m comparing Thatcher to the enlightenment – pick the major societal event of your choosing). The best that can be hoped for is to curb the worst excesses of a lurch too far to the right – see Rawls justice as fairness if you like (Amazon workers on zero hours contracts sleeping in bus shelters because they wouldn’t be able to get to work on time otherwise and don’t want to risk losing a days pay but I bet the ‘real working class’, who ever they are, tap away online buying their shit from Amazon). As to JCs views on humanity see EDM 1255 in the 2003–04 session of Parliament. Sadly, many thousands of years of human history show us to be quite an unpleasant species and we might wish it was otherwise but its not – think Hobbes and the life of man in the state of nature etc.

my contempt for JC and his ilk are that they allowed Thatcher free reign and to transform society to what it is today.

Definitely the fault of those who opposed her rather than those who voted for her

Yes, definitely, no effective opposition – they didn’t oppose her because of socialist naivety and daydreaming and a public fed up of being held hostage by what was perceived (and was) weak labour governments being undermined by overweening trade unions.

I get your point – weak opposition helped her deliver her agenda- however its still the fault of those who did it and not those who opposed it.

Actually its not the left that let thatcher in. It was splittists from the right of the labour party forming the SDP and splitting the leftwing vote. something some of the gang of four have regretted ever since.

so yes this could well be history repeating itself as the right of the labour party are going to be responsible for greater periods of tory rule by damaging the party.

Which is doing more damage to the labour party. corbyn or the right with their constant undermining of him? You know – the daily press releases etc all aimed at causing maximum damage. Stuff like Alexanders piece in the guardian the other day where she outright lies about her motivations.

Genuine question, if a government has a majority what can the opposition do?

Labour couldn’t stop Andrew Landsleys NHS changes going through despite Miliband being ahead in the polls and the party united behind him. Bedroom tax etc

It seems like people want Corbyn to look a certain way and would be happy if he scored the odd point in PMQs.

Which is doing more damage to the labour party. corbyn or the right with their constant undermining of him?

The ‘right’ has 170+ MPs, so it would be Corbyn.

Noted but if the opposition had got their act together it might have been one term rather than the rest – all that was achieved was the split and the SDP and that should tell you something about peoples wish for moderately left of centre party.

@tj agree completely the PLP are weakening Labour by their behaviour. They are giving the Tories sticks to hit Corbyn with!

Brexit was a complete Tory **** up and Corbyn is being blamed for it!

Yes – the SDP and the liberal democrats are irrelevant todays politics with almost no representation and a small % of the vote. The blame for The thatcher yeas rests firmly on the shoulders of those who split the left – and that was the gang of four.

Revise history all you want. It does not alter the facts.

I’m amazed that you still maintain this completely made up nonsense binners that Sadiq Khan was well known to Londoners and that they didn’t vote for him simply because he was the official Labour Party candidate.

where’s your evidence for that – Sadiq was regularly featured in the Evening Standard and I think has a column in it as well. That’s a pretty popular paper in London and it’s stories are often echoed in the Metro the next day, which is also quite popular.

Even though the standard was pro Goldsmith Sadiq was given pretty equal covergae I reckon.

Revise history all you want. It does not alter the facts.

Horses and mouths spring to mind all of a sudden

Ctk, google givernment defeats – its not unknown.

Blame for Brexit needs to be laid at many doors.But don’t forget that by his own admission that was Jezza doing his best. So the level of the bar has been set quite clearly.

But the revisionist approach to the rise of the Ernie’s poster girl is quiet something and illustrative of the “it’s never our fault” brigade.

The blame for The thatcher years rests firmly on the shoulders of those who split the left – and that was the gang of four.

By that token, you could argue that the blame lies with those who made life intolerable for the gang of four: all that militant tendency stuff, de-selection and dragging the Labour party to the left.

EDIT: I think this really may well be one of the daftest threads I’ve seen for a while on STW, but that’s not necessarily a negative.

tjagain – Member

Actually its not the left that let thatcher in. It was splittists from the right of the labour party forming the SDP and splitting the leftwing vote

Hmmm, Thatcher became PM in 1979, SDP formed in 1981. Not sure how this is possible.

if a government has a majority what can the opposition do?

Not a lot tbh Power rests in the Mps within the party when they have a small majority – they have lots of power as not many need to revolt for the govt to lose.
The argument would be the opposition holds the govt to account by effective opposing and scrutinising their policies. I think this is largely fanciful in a heavily whipped chamber.

The ‘right’ has 170+ MPs, so it would be Corbyn.

How were labour in the polls before this ?
How are they now?
Did the SDP harm or help labour?
What % of the party agree with Corbyn and disagree with the MPs

But the revisionist approach to the rise of the Ernie’s poster girl is quiet something and illustrative of the “it’s never our fault” brigade.

It would be a wee bit more compelling if you bothered to add any facts to your usual dismissive scorn….go on teacher give it a go 😉
Blaming those who lose the election for what the winners do is an interesting logical position to say the least. Contributed possible but the authors of it – prima facie complete bollocks hence you went for slur bereft of argument.

FWIW ernie has been consistent in disagreeing with the cult of personality over the iron lady and the lefts focus on her, even your cheap slur has no basis in fact…like you care.

What % of the party agree with Corbyn and disagree with the MPs

I do find the obsession with the party odd. It’s voters that matter. Mps represent voters and seem to be the only ones who care about votes.

Hmmm, Thatcher became PM in 1979, SDP formed in 1981. Not sure how this is possible.

Revise history? Then you can alter the facts to suit 😀

I do find the obsession with the party odd.

you find it odd the labour party is obsessed with the wishes of the labour party members?
Pretty sure they are Labour MP’s and they represent the party and the conference that creates and approves policies

I did not realise that constitutionally all that mattered was what the Mps think – perhaps you can reference that in labour party articles?
Anyway we were discussing who harmed the party have you looked at the polls as to where they were before the Mps decided to ignore the party and try unconstitutional shenanigans to rid them of the leader?
Perhaps you wish to sidestep that one as well
Lets be honest their obsession with votes – from either the labour party or the wider election is not exactly bearing fruit is it.Obviously that is someone else fault.

No winners here but dont pretend Mps are blameless here.

No winners here but dont pretend Mps are blameless here.

Agreed. They started this gigantic slow motion crash in the first place. But it was an accident. They really didn’t mean for JC to win.

labour party members only represent a small percentage of the people that voted for the MPs – the MPs ‘mandate’ is wider than just labour party members.

I did not realise that constitutionally all that mattered was what the Mps think – perhaps you can reference that in labour party articles?

The MP represents those that voted for them, they are the elected voice for them so that is what matters…

so yes this could well be history repeating itself as the right of the labour party are going to be responsible for greater periods of tory rule by damaging the party.

I thought you didn’t want the Blairite cuckoos in the Labour Party anyway

The Sadiq Khan interview pretty much sums up what the majority of people have (hardly surprisingly) concluded. And that all poling backs up. That Jeremy is a well-meaning, decent bloke, with a lot of firmly held beliefs that most people would support, but…..

He has found himself woefully out of his depth as leader of the opposition. This was glaringly apparent in the EU referendum. And with the best will in the world, he hasn’t got a cat in hells chance of winning a general election, and in fact if he is at the helm at that point tge Labour Party will be decimated

Are we not all liberal democrats:

The Liberal Democrats exist to build and safeguard a fair, free and open society, in which we seek to balance the fundamental values of liberty, equality and community, and in which no one shall be enslaved by poverty, ignorance or conformity

I am! And so’s my wife!

[video]https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=4SYc_flMnMQ[/video]

So how’s this Cooperative Party idea going to work? Will the cooperate?

Are we not all liberal democrats

Looks at last election result
Concludes we are not

He has found himself woefully out of his depth as leader of the opposition

true they tried so hard to give him their backing and help and respect the aprty and the fact they have acted like this is definitely a shortcoming of his rather than their inability to accept the leadership vote
They wont follow him – we all know this assigning blame is a bit pointless tbh we need to look for a solution

its a real shame some sort of compromise could not be reached as its its evident he is going to win again, change the NEC and then beat them to death with his new – possibly higher?- mandate from the party

they will still continue to do this i imagine and continue to blame him for their refusal to follow him or the party

Its a **** mess basically and all sides should be looking for some sort of peace deal. At the moment they are digging trenches, and as this thread proves, the RW are loving it and the only real winners here.

I think something had to change in the Labour Party. Members knew it and wanted it, nobody wanted to have another 5 years of so so opposition with Cooper or Burnham or Kendall. Corbyn offered a change and smashed the election because he stood for something and had ideas and policies (yes he did)

Its a massive **** up now and I blame most of it on the plotters. I am not blind to Corbyn’s failures but until a better option presents itself I’ll stick with him.

I think most folk will see the plotters to blame – especially a they keep on lying in the press and Corbyn is not making public criticism of them in the same way. One thing the public hate above all else is public disunity in political parties.

As I have said labour tried to be all things to all people for a couple of decades now – steadily losing vote share until they lost 2 elections in a row.

the problem is the anti corbyn lot are psychologically unable to accept they are in the wrong as it would mean admitting to themselves that ditching their idealism was wrong and that they have wasted a large part of their political careers.

Alexander for example refused to stand alongside the junior doctors in their strike – a strike that had the support of the majority of the public. How much stronger would both the labour party and the doctors have been if we had seen the entire PLP on the picket lines?