Viewing 40 posts - 41 through 80 (of 132 total)
  • not so Red Ed?
  • binners
    Full Member

    Suck it up and take a hit on living standards to be able to compete? Undesirable, but will probably be the default result we get.

    I think that’s pretty much what we’ve all already accepted. Like we had an option? Best to be in a job, on reduced terms and relative salary, than the bleak hopelessness of unemployment. hence a grudging, weary acceptance of Osbourne’s ‘there is no Plan B’ mantra

    But profiteering employers have seized their moment. Hence the proliferation of part time work (with much less protection or duty on the employer), zero hours contracts, and the demise of pay rises for years.

    And that was manageable to sell when there was no economic growth. But if things are starting to improve, but those at the top benefit massively, while nobody else sees any change to these conditions, then I doubt people are going to just take it on the chin, as they have done so far, without serious protest. If the minimum wage, since its introduction, had kept pace with exeutive pay, it would now stand at £19 and hour!

    So its an opportunity for the labour party to seize the initiative and start doing what they were always meant to be doing, and fighting for more equal rights for workers.

    Is this likely to happen? Well… what do you think?

    kimbers
    Full Member

    it would now stand at £19 and hour!

    busted – you read toynbee!!

    binners
    Full Member

    Curses! I’d already read that stat somewhere else (more credible) before she emailed her copy in from Tuscany though 😉

    dazh
    Full Member

    So its an opportunity for the labour party to seize the initiative and start doing what they were always meant to be doing, and fighting for more equal rights for workers.

    This is what p*sses me off the most. I’m convinced that if the Labour party came out all guns blazing on the attack about profiteering corporations, zero hours contracts, cuts in local services, the living wage, benefits cuts, demonisation of immigrants, housing shortages, the city of london, tax evasion etc, then a huge number of ‘normal’ people would be behind them and the next election would be a shoe-in. Instead what do we get? Mealy-mouthed half measures and tory-light rubbish about ‘one nation’, and endless navel-gazing about the link to the unions. It’s just pathetic beyond words.

    rudebwoy
    Free Member

    the labour party has long since been hi jacked by self serving middle class folk– the latest whimpering from the millipede is as MSP states, a message to business and the ruling class , that they are a safe bet for no interference with the status quo–they foolishly think they can harvest the mythical middle england vote allied with the taken for granted working class vote( those that still bother)–his father would be disappointed….a vaccum is developing on the left in this country, and i am sure a new radical force would gather support pretty quickly with the right programme–not neccessarily parlimentary– as that also is a three card trick…

    binners
    Full Member

    rudeboy – exactly the point made in todays Guardian by John Harris

    dazh
    Full Member

    and i am sure a new radical force would gather support pretty quickly with the right programme

    The trouble is that this appears to be UKIP. I know everyone goes on about the UKIP threat to the tories, but I actually think that they’re more of a threat to the labour party, who will see a large section of it’s support in the north moving towards the reactionary UKIP policies about benefits scroungers, europe and immigrants.

    ninfan
    Free Member

    the labour party has long since been hi jacked by self serving middle class folk

    T’was ever thus

    the Labour Party is a thoroughly bourgeois party, because, although made up of workers, it is led by reactionaries, and the worst kind of reactionaries at that, who act quite in the spirit of the bourgeoisie. It is an organisation of the bourgeoisie, which exists to systematically dupe the workers

    Lenin, 1920

    😆

    Heres a 100% serious question – why do we need both a ‘living’ wage and a ‘minimum’ wage?

    Labour introduced minimum wage legislation, instead of promising us something else, why don’t they pledge to increase the minimum wage to a rate that everyone can live on? I mean, isn’t being able to live on a wage pretty much a minimum requirement?

    kimbers
    Full Member

    Id agree about the UKIP thing, my parents are previous labour voters but have drifted into the clutches of that **** farage and its all thanks to the daily mail!

    rogerthecat
    Free Member

    The old political model just doesn’t fit the current shape of UK society, parties fail to have support because they have ceased to be relevant (Tories excluded as there will always be rich folks who want to remain rich by whatever means).

    @ninfan – my 13 yr old communist will love that one, thanks.

    binners
    Full Member

    Previous labour voters who read the Daily Mail? 😯

    I think the labour party are in for a serious shock at the next election at just how many of their core voters, who they’ve taken for granted, and done absolutely nothing for, will just not bother voting this time out. Or, like you said, vote for UKIP

    One thing smaller parties like UKIP (and unfortunately the BNP) are very good at is getting voters out to actually vote. Other than making sure that the Tories don’t get in, there’s no positive reason to vote labour whatsoever

    kimbers
    Full Member

    binners – Member
    Previous labour voters who read the Daily Mail?

    oh my mum started buying it for the free dvds apparently but got slowly sucked in
    we seem to have discussions now where my parents take a standpoint completely opposite to the values they taught me when I was younger 🙁

    teamhurtmore
    Free Member

    It would be great to see a new left wing party as it gets a little silly having people line Harriet Harman ‘representing’ (sic) the needs of workers and lower-income groups. Ditto those Labour MPs whose rhetoric is not matched by their actions (eg schooling etc) – almost as silly as CMD not sending his children to an independent school. WTF are they trying to prove? They are fooling no one.

    So lets see the unions put their money where there mouths are. Ok, so there is a challenge of having only approx 50% of the members in 1979 but at least these numbers have stabilised and even risen recently. And then what of TU membership trends:

    1. Women employees are more likely than men to be a member – so the womens’ voice could be better represented
    2. Members are increasingly older people – ditto their interests would be represented
    3. Ditto UK born and black ethnic groups
    4. The disabled ” “
    5. Highly educated ” “
    6. Full time employment

    etc….so their is a powerful lobby to represent with important constituents to support you. Bob Crowe has been talking about it for far to long. Lets see some action!

    3 million….affiliated in name only…..the bigger risk is carrying on as we are….after all it is you that has been telling me that the Labour Party isn’t sufficiently connected with the lives of working people…

    Ed Milliband 10 Sept 2013. There you go, enough said….

    konabunny
    Free Member

    I find it very sad that unions have become so demonised in this country, that they are no longer seen as organisations which can (and have) actually stand up for ordinary workers.

    Yeah, but that wasn’t solely the fault of the Murdoch-Blair-Cameron axis. Some unions assisted the process by fighting losing battles, being corrupt, and failing to serve their members and pissing off their actual or potential membership.

    Unions are stifling business in this county to such an extent that few companies would expand in this country anymore…Want to look for one of the key reasons big Manufacturing has declined in this country?

    Pfft, whatever. Unions are powerless in private workplaces and the UK’s labour laws are among the most flexible in the world. And isn’t it the case that manufacturing produces just as much (inflation adjusted) value as ever, just with a smaller and more efficient workforce?

    Northwind
    Full Member

    konabunny – Member

    isn’t it the case that manufacturing produces just as much (inflation adjusted) value as ever, just with a smaller and more efficient workforce?

    Record high for UK manufacturing value was 2010, IIRC, it’s climbed pretty steadily since the war. But yep, other sectors have outperformed it, and other countries have outperformed us

    (which is completely inevitable, as larger countries elsewhere modernise- we punched above our weight because of the head start we had, not because of some ongoing right to be an industrial powerhouse- that said we are still IIRC the 7th or 8th most powerful manufacturing nation in the world.)

    rudebwoy
    Free Member

    lots of thought for food– but those right wing fools who think that their days in the sun are forever are in for an almighty shock n awe, the collective might of the masses has got us where we are today– not some bourgeois trickle down nonsense or individual effort –some people really do live in their own comfy world….twas ever thus…as the big man said , many can describe the situation , our job is to change it !!

    dannyh
    Free Member

    the collective might of the masses has got us where we are today

    Free-market capitalism tinged with individual examples of extreme greed, then?

    dazh
    Full Member

    many can describe the situation , our job is to change it !!

    *Holds fist in the air* 😀

    teamhurtmore
    Free Member

    rudebwoy – Member
    the collective might of the masses has got us where we are today– not some bourgeois trickle down nonsense or individual effort

    Interesting take on how the UK or any economy works. How about ALL the factors of production coming together successfully instead? Labour without land or capital wont get you too far, nor will capital without land or labour.

    Its been pretty gloomy in the Uk for the past few years – where were the days in the sun that are forever?

    rudebwoy
    Free Member

    there are people who have done very well out of free reign(rigged) markets– and those that get the crumbs off their table–some of whom pipe away on here –the status quo suits them fine–re distribution of wealth does not– me , i would be very ruthless with all those ruling class lackeys….

    dannyh
    Free Member

    Interesting take on how the UK or any economy works. How about ALL the factors of production coming together successfully instead? Labour without land or capital wont get you too far, nor will capital without land or labour.

    That simply won’t do. You cannot possibly expect comprimise from comrade rudebwoy. That would mean having to change world-view. Does not compute. 25 years in the gulag for you.

    In the meantime, I’ll be one of the first up against the wall come the revolution. It really doesn’t do to have dissenting voices when you’re trying to change the world ‘for the better’, you know!

    dannyh
    Free Member

    Oh, and please refer to rudebwoy’s comment above:

    i would be very ruthless with all those ruling class lackeys….

    For an indication of how he would like to implement a fairer society.

    In the past, I had assumed that rudebwoy would just explain away mass deportations, executions, state terror and state-induced famine as ‘the wrong kind of communism’.

    Now I’m not so sure – perhaps he just wants a re-run of the past – presumably with himself as General Secretary(?)

    Lifer
    Free Member

    Steady on McCarthy.

    MSP
    Full Member

    In the past, I had assumed that rudebwoy would just explain away mass deportations, executions, state terror and state-induced famine as ‘the wrong kind of communism’.

    How would you explain them away in capitalist countries? The wrong kind of free market?

    teamhurtmore
    Free Member

    I know I have asked this before, but I am still waiting for answer….can anyone give me an example of a free market society? I can recall lots of mixed economies (such as the UK) that combine state and market mechanisms but I still can’t find his mythical free market economy that seems to attract so much criticism.

    dazh
    Full Member

    In the past, I had assumed that rudebwoy would just explain away mass deportations, executions, state terror and state-induced famine as ‘the wrong kind of communism’.

    In this I don’t see any difference between that sort of socialism and capitalism. The socialists are happy to do this sort of thing within their own countries, the capitalists export it to other areas of the world and then call them ‘developing’ countries whilst peddling the myth to their own populations that they are ‘free’. It’s rather clever really.

    dannyh
    Free Member

    How would you explain them away in capitalist countries? The wrong kind of free market?

    Yes, absolutely. In the narrow sense of the question, that is.

    You’ll notice (hopefully) that I haven’t actually extolled any virtues of the ‘free market’ here!

    You don’t actually know what my position is, other than the fact that I am opposed to dictatorial communism.

    dazh
    Full Member

    You don’t actually know what my position is, other than the fact that I am opposed to dictatorial communism.

    What about dictatorial capitalism? I don’t see much difference with communism and capitalism really, they’re both based on authoritarianism. The main difference as I see it is that the capitalist flavour gives you a wider range of products to consume, and for some reason this keeps people happy enough to accept it.

    MSP
    Full Member

    I know I have asked this before, but I am still waiting for answer….can anyone give me an example of a free market society? I can recall lots of mixed economies (such as the UK) that combine state and market mechanisms but I still can’t find his mythical free market economy that seems to attract so much criticism.

    The Friedmanite economies coerced into south America in the 70’s are as close to a free market as anything in the old eastern block was to communism.

    teamhurtmore
    Free Member

    MSP, can you expand?

    dannyh
    Free Member

    Yep, I’m opposed to dictatorial capitalism as well. Although you tend to notice that dictatorial systems tend to be anti-competition whatever their stripe.

    Far right groups seek to artificially enrich or preserve the wealth of an elite, more often than not defined on racial grounds. In this pursuit, they scapegoat, and indulge in the politics of the common enemy. It wasn’t called Nationalism SOCIALISM for nothing, you know. It was socialism if you were in ‘the club’. If you weren’t in, then you were expected to die off, or be helped along the way.

    In this sense, communism and Nazism are very similar, the only real distinction is how each system defines ‘the enemy’.

    konabunny
    Free Member

    It wasn’t called Nationalism SOCIALISM for nothing, you know. It was socialism if you were in ‘the club’.

    This is complete pish. Neither the Nazi system nor ideology (practice and theory, in other words) put much value in public ownership of the means of production. The essence of fascism in economics is the co-ordination of private capital and labour blocs by the state as they inherently conflict.

    Northwind
    Full Member

    dannyh – Member

    It wasn’t called Nationalism SOCIALISM for nothing, you know.

    That’s right, they named it that to make it easier to sell, because Insane Murderous Fascism isn’t so catchy

    bokonon
    Free Member

    In this sense, communism and Nazism are very similar, the only real distinction is how each system defines ‘the enemy’.

    Given that communists define the enemy as “capital” and the related extraction of surplus value from labour – both of which are abstract concepts and not people – it seems odd to even start to compare it to a system which explicitly outlines a group or groups of actual people as “the enemy”.

    Capitalists are only capitalists because they are the ones holding the capital (or more accurately, the capital is holding them…) there is nothing wrong with them as people and I would argue that it is in their long term (as in 7 generations and all that) interest for them not to be capitalists, they act against their own interests by advancing the interests of capital.

    cheekyboy
    Free Member

    That’s right, they named it that to make it easier to sell, because Insane Murderous Fascism isn’t so catchy

    Thats why they used communism instead of genocidal collectivism

    dazh
    Full Member

    Thats why they used communism instead of genocidal collectivism

    Or rather that the genocidal collectivism was labelled as communism by the capitalists as it was a convenient way to poison the communist ideology in the eyes of the public. The Stalinist model of authoritarian socialism was a far cry from the communism envisioned by Marx and Lenin. What Stalin did with collectivism and the gulags had about as much to do with communism as Hitler did with capitalism. It’s a pity these debates get so hung up on the labels rather than the actual ideas and policies.

    dannyh
    Free Member

    Hmmm.

    I think you might do well to do a bit more reading about what Lenin actually said and wrote about the ‘necessary measures’ to implement Marxism. And the now much-revered Trotsky for that matter.

    Lenin’s good fortune (in the eyes of journalism-history) was to die before the full ramifications of what he had created became apparent.

    You are being disingenuous at best.

    rudebwoy
    Free Member

    dannyh telling people to read more marxism–thats quite ironic– for me its a choice between an ideology that promotes equality, and shares its resources amongst all its people, or the one we have now where a tiny minority benefit off the backs of everyone else– even those who are exploited sometimes don’t even realise it…

    cheekyboy
    Free Member

    It’s a pity these debates get so hung up on the labels rather than the actual ideas and policies.

    By labels can we assume you mean historical fact ?

    Wouldnt you think it fair to say that many of us get hung up on the fact that all of these failed ideologies end up the same ie. a lot of dead innocent people, misery and hardship followed by criminal/oligarchical rule
    There will always be apologists for these regimes who will defend it saying it wasnt carried out as intended, even if it had been carried out as intended it would have possibly created more needless death and destruction.

    bokonon
    Free Member

    Wouldnt you think it fair to say that many of us get hung up on the fact that all of these failed ideologies end up the same ie. a lot of dead innocent people, misery and hardship followed by criminal/oligarchical rule

    How is that different to the current prevailing successful ideology? War after war after war, millions of innocent people dead in the service capital, the crushing misery of relentless enforced wage slavery, ruled by war criminals and their friends.

    I’m not detecting a clear distinction between that which you criticise and the current situation – except perhaps that the real horrors are kept at arms length and justified through some backwards logic of helping.

Viewing 40 posts - 41 through 80 (of 132 total)

The topic ‘not so Red Ed?’ is closed to new replies.