Forum menu
I suspect an alternative to Trident would be more conventional forces
The alternative to trident is no trident, then spending the money saved on something useful like education. Trident is just about giving America our money so we can be part of their gang.
COMMUNIST!!!
Views and Policies are not the same thing, one man should not be the policy author for any party.
IIRC, one reason that a lot of people voted for him was his willingness to democratise Labour's policy making process. They expected him to spend a couple of years doing that, then make way for someone new to lead them into the 2020 election.
Of course it is, but politicians seems to like maintaining defence spending to cover "international responsibilities" and the illusion of the UK's (or perhaps their) importance in the world.The alternative to trident is no trident, then spending the money saved on something useful like education.
Stop listening to the social media echo chamber and look at the polling
Poor choice of words, I should have said "i agree with you it is ludicrous to believe trident is militarily essential". My main point holds true.
outofbreath - Member"The neoliberal consensus is now completely dead"
No it isn't. The vast majority of the the voters are still centrists. All that's happened is one of the parties has shunned all those votes and gone back to its roots.
You are using your own personal definition for the term "political consensus" and ignoring the definition used by most other people :
[i]"Consensus politics suggests a strong and broad agreement between the main political parties"[/i]
The neoliberal consensus is now completely dead, one of the main political parties no longer supports neolibralism.
This new position has been very heavily endorsed by party members. Time to accept reality.
Other people who think Trident renewal is pointless include [url= http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-20179604 ]former Tory defence minister Michael Portillo[/url], [url= http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2009/jan/16/trident-is-20bn-waste-say-generals ]former head of the armed forces Field Marshal Lord Bramall[/url], and [url= http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2015/03/exclusive-75-labour-ppcs-oppose-trident-renewal ]75% of Labours PPCs in the last General Election[/url]. Plus, the [url= https://www.greenparty.org.uk/news/2015/04/09/green-mps-will-push-labour-on-trident-debate,-says-natalie-bennett/ ]Green Party[/url], the [url= http://www.libdems.org.uk/trident ]Lib Dems[/url], and the [url= http://www.snp.org/media-centre/news/2015/apr/trident-unusable-and-indefensible ]SNP[/url].
. Time to accept reality.
The reason for all the hilarity is that one of the big parties has publicly regected reality.
mikewsmith - Member
Views and Policies are not the same thing, one man should not be the policy author for any party.
That's just people trying to cause mischief, Corbyn is all about creating a democratic party from what I can read. Under that situation his opinions aren't irrelevant, but they clearly aren't the be and end all.
See how it plays out and what policy this new look labour party actually comes up with. Personally I doubt, as the tory media will have you believe, that it'll be a list Corbyn's opionions on all matters. Democracy is compromise and consenus, kinda obvious I'd have thought.
I reckon we should maybe allow them time to develop and [b]publish [/b]their policy before we criticize it.
Tridents one for 2020, unless there are any votes coming up regarding renewall?
labour-snp etc could cause problems for that
Its the EU referendum thats more relevant, Corbyn hasnt laid out what his position is as far as Im aware
Im not sure if this makes it easier for the tories or more difficult, they handled the Scottish one badly, relying on Brown to pull off a last minute save.
You got a link to the policies you disagree with?outofbreath - Member
. Time to accept reality.
The reason for all the hilarity is that one of the big parties has publicly regected reality.
The reason for all the hilarity is that one of the big parties has publicly regected reality.
To be honest I don't see many people laughing, whatever they might have been doing 2 or 3 months ago.
But anyway, you accept that the neoliberal consensus is now completely dead ?
Personal I doubt, as the tory media will have you believe, that it'll be a list Corbyn's opionions on all matters.
So you predict he'll betray the people who voted for him.
To make a change, you have to be in power - otherwise it's just noise.
Michael Gove doesn't share your view. On the A.M. show he said there was a great deal of concern in the Conservative Party that the next election was winnable by a Corbyn-led Labour Party.
outofbreath - Member
So you predict he'll betray the people who voted for him.
I'm hoping he opens up policy to the membership and allows the grassroots to directly develop policy in a truly democratic movement.
I think it may comes down to whos still around in 4 years time
corbyn will be 70, rupert murdoch will be 89, Im not sure of a diet of Islington farmers market's finest organic produce or fresh babies keeps you alive longer
You got a link to the policies you disagree with?
His policies so far are on the BBC website.
I not going to spend my day writing out and essay on those I support. (Or don't support.)
Mr Woppit - MemberMichael Gove doesn't share your view. On the A.M. show he said there was a great deal of concern in the Conservative Party that the next election was winnable by a Corbyn-led Labour Party.
Judge them by their actions so far, it's obvious that they think he's a threat. He wsa their number one target through the election, which some tried to explain away as them wanting him to win- but now anyone can see that's not the case.
The Labour Party lost because they were perceived to have shifted too far to the left (!!!) and elsewhere we have socialist gov implementing budget surpluses in the height of a recession and or supply side policies. Neo-L is dead, long live Neo-L ( to the extent it really exists)
outofbreath - Member
You got a link to the policies you disagree with?
His policies so far are on the BBC website.I not going to spend my day writing out and essay on those I support. (Or don't support.)
Funny how when I look at the labour party site it still says a note from Ed Milliband when I look at policy.
One would surmise that new labour policy has yet to be published.
Vast majority I know deserted them because they were nothing more than tory lite.teamhurtmore - Member
The Labour Party lost because they were perceived to have shifted too far to the left
The neoliberal consensus is now completely dead, one of the main political parties no longer supports neolibralism
I don't see how you can make that claim, while at the same time stating that Corbyn can't dictate policies, and that they have to be brought about democratically through the party.
I'm not 100% sure McDonnell is a good choice as shadow chancellor, for the only reason that if he's to build bridges with the moderate PLP, a less incendiary character might have been a better choice, not that there were many options. Still I suppose it shows he plans to start as he means to go on and won't compromise himself.
[url= http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/sep/13/jeremy-corbyn-opponents-stop-sniping-gmb-union-paul-kenny ]Paul Kenny's comments about the refusenik MPs[/url] was dead on. If they really can't accept the democratic wishes of the party then they should consider their positions. They can't have it both ways.
Come on Seosamh this is STWI reckon we should maybe allow them time to develop and publish their policy before we criticize it
Vast majority I know deserted them because they were nothing more than tory lite.
The electorate will decide if they want him to lead. And, however they/we choose, we will all have to accept that's how democracy works and not spend 4 years crying and whining like spoilt children about it.
"The neoliberal consensus is now completely dead, one of the main political parties no longer supports neolibralism"I don't see how you can make that claim, while at the same time stating that Corbyn can't dictate policies, and that they have to be brought about democratically through the party.
It's pretty damn obvious that the neoliberal consensus is dead, the Labour Party has just overwhelmingly voted for the one candidate completely opposed to it to be leader.
Wake up ninfan.
In what way? Those MPs were elected by the electorate on the basis of the election manifesto and have an obligation to serve. I'd argue that's a higher obligation than to party.If they really can't accept the democratic wishes of the party then they should consider their positions
If the party wishes to move materially from that Manifesto then it is the Party's mandate from the electorate which is in question, not the position of MPs who were elected.
The Labour Party lost because they were perceived to have shifted too far to the left (!!!)
Aside from the fact that they were wiped out in Scotland by a more left wing party...
Those MPs were elected by the electorate on the basis of the election manifesto and have an obligation to serve. I'd argue that's a higher obligation than to party.
You think the people who voted for Corbyn did so on the basis of Labour's manifesto?
Regarding why labour lost it's interesting to compare the numbers from 2010 to 2015
If you look at labours result, they actually improved on their vote share by 1.5% and that's when you consider that the SNP took 3.7% directly from them, that's actually reasonably impressive considering their collapse in Scotland(which is absolutely because they are viewed as tory lite).
So labour actually took around 5% of the lidem votes that were up for grabs, the tories took about 0.8% and the result of the lib dem vote got divied up between UKIP and the Greens.
It obviously doens't work out exactly like that, as I'm generalising, a lot. But in 5 years time people will be bored with the tories and looking for an alternative, and there really hasn't been a collapse of the core labour vote in england and wales imo.
So I don't particularly see the next GE as being a direct fight against the tories, if labour can pick up votes from the SNP and more importantly reverse the UKIP rise(a protest vote imo) and take back some votes from the greens, then they are looking good the next election.
Aside from the fact that they were wiped out in Scotland by a more left wing party...
Actually imo the SNP wasn't more left-wing than Labour at the last general election, in fact the reverse is probably true.
However the important point is that the SNP was generally [i]perceived[/i] to be more left-wing than Labour, that's clearly what attracted many voters to them.
Doesn't matter what you or I think and it doesn't really matter what anyone's motivation for voting was. That's the mandate the MPs have and there were about 20 times more votes for Labour at the GE than in the party leadership election.You think the people who voted for Corbyn did so on the basis of Labour's manifesto
Right-wingers didn't say that ^^ when Tony Blair completely changed the direction of the Party.
And he had less support from the Party than Corbyn has.
In what way? Those MPs were elected by the electorate on the basis of the election manifesto and have an obligation to serve. I'd argue that's a higher obligation than to party.
Whether you like it or not, we have a party based system. If MPs can no longer support the party which they stood for, they should resign from the party and their position as MP and stand as an independent, or for another party, in a by-election. Something tells me there won't be many putting themselves forward for this.
Ernie as you know it's my belief Corbyns election will be the end of left wing Laboir politics for a generation or more, perhaps forever. Corbyn will try and move the Labour Party significantly to the left which will prove to be an electoral disaster assuming he actually makes it to an election. Labour will subsequently regroup and once again try and move back to the centre ground.
Labour under Milliband had no economic credibility and under Corbyn they'll be off the charts.
I still cannot believe they are openly singing the Red Flag, it's an open PR goal for the Tories to exploit. Too easy to portray this for what it is, Trotskiests and strikes disrupting people's lives.
We know what, Corbyn stands for on Trident, he against it in theory. However in practice he seems. Dry reluctant to say so now he's the leader. Just like he won't say how many refugees the UK should take. Being in a protest political is very different to be the leader.
True. But if the party changes so that it ceases to be or offer what it presented to the electorate, then by your logic it should also resign and seek a new mandate.If MPs can no longer support the party which they stood for, they should resign from the party
Just to be clear, I'm not arguing for either - just responding to a comment that MPs should consider their position. I don't think they have to until it comes to GE 2020 candidate selection and whether or not the proposition from the party at that point is one they can support.
I still cannot believe they are openly singing the Red Flag, it's an open PR goal for the Tories to exploit. Too easy to portray this for what it is, Trotskiests and strikes disrupting people's lives.
Aren't strikes now all but illegal under the Tories new proposals?
I do agree with you that having Billy Bragg singing the Red Flag is just an open invitation for the right wing press to declare war on you. But they were always going to do that anyway.
oldbloke - Member
If MPs can no longer support the party which they stood for, they should resign from the party
True. But if the party changes so that it ceases to be or offer what it presented to the electorate, then by your logic it should also resign and seek a new mandate.
But, they can only get a mandate from a general election and that's up to the tories to call.
[quote=seosamh77 said]
But, they can only get a mandate from a general election and that's up to the tories to call.
Not any longer, fixed term parliament act and all that.
[quote=dazh said]
Whether you like it or not, we have a party based system. If MPs can no longer support the party which they stood for, they should resign from the party and their position as MP and stand as an independent, or for another party, in a by-election. Something tells me there won't be many putting themselves forward for this.
Should Corbyn have done this during the Blair/Brown/Milliband years ?
Never knew about that, cheers.allthepies - Member
Not any longer, fixed term parliament act and all that.
Should Corbyn have done this during the Blair/Brown/Milliband years ?
Corbyn had the support of the labour membership, then as he does now. Many of those now [s]resigning[/s] not being invited to be part of the shadow cabinet and making a public show of it, will find they do not.
@ernie its support from the electorate you need not the party and that where Corbyn is going to come badly unstuck
I posted back a while ago Corbyn could be a godsend for the Lib Dems allowing them space in the middle ground. However increasingly I think the Tories will is in policies of the centre, they have been relentlessly pushing the message that they are the party or working people. They will emphasise this and differentiate themselves from Labour who they will portray as the party of people that don't work or don't want to work (which is how many people see trade Unionists). It will be powerful and effective IMO
I think the Tories will is in policies of the centre, they have been relentlessly pushing the message that they are the party or working people
They can say it as much as they like, today's debate shows them up as liars who despise working people.
<bookmarks thread for future reference to see who knows what they're talking about>
Because it was quite funny re-reading the post 2010 election threads about how the ConDems wouldn't see out the term, etc.