Viewing 40 posts - 21,121 through 21,160 (of 21,646 total)
  • Sir! Keir! Starmer!
  • frankconway
    Full Member

    Lynch’s other comments are nothing out of the ordinary.
    I doubt anyone is looking to give Starmer carte blanche, a blank cheque or any form of free pass.
    From Starmer’s side, I doubt there will be any ‘rolling over’ in response to union demands.
    Grown-up politics with a mature attitude isn’t too much to expect – or is it?

    ernielynch
    Full Member

    Yes of course Lynch’s comments are perfectly reasonable. But no there are plenty of people who appear to give Starmer a carte blanche to do whatever he wants.

    Just look at the multitude of U-turns that Starmer has carried out before even becoming prime minister – it’s becoming the stuff of legends.

    Some people believe that Starmer’s position is perfectly correct before he performs a U-turn, and then they totally support him after he has preformed a U-turn – which is the complete opposite of his previous position.

    They give Starmer a blank cheque to do whatever he wants to do.

    RichPenny
    Free Member

    I chuckle every time I see that graph, The Truss Needle. Then I remember that she **** us all, and that’s what it represents 😥

    kerley
    Free Member

    Some people believe that Starmer’s position is perfectly correct before he performs a U-turn, and then they totally support him after he has preformed a U-turn – which is the complete opposite of his previous position.

    It is odd, but probably comes from desperation of just wanting tories out and doing nothing to lessen the chances.

    I also want that but can also criticise Starmers massive change from what he was offering just a few years years ago to what he is offering now, especially as it would have probably made no difference to his chances of becoming PM.

    MoreCashThanDash
    Full Member

    Just look at the multitude of U-turns that Starmer has carried out before even becoming prime minister – it’s becoming the stuff of legends.

    Seriously!? How many U turns have the actual bloody government made in that time?

    If you’re focusing on Starmers policy changes, they’ve got you just where they want you!

    MSP
    Full Member

    Just because the Tories are lying psychopaths doesn’t mean that Starmer has to follow their lead down a path of dishonesty.

    Your post just proves Ernie’s point.

    Holding Starmer accountable for his dishonesty doesn’t mean any of us are voting torie, but if he wants to give people a reason to vote for him, instead of keeping relying on anti tory sentiment he needs to be more honest. And the complacency that many warn about shouldn’t be focussed on the mythical swing voters, it should be focussed on the millions of people who need a labour government to be a an honest party of the people, who Starmer is currently ignoring or at best taking for granted.

    rone
    Full Member

    I would not mind a U-turn if it actually swung towards good policy rather than away.

    ernielynch
    Full Member

    Seriously!? How many U turns have the actual bloody government made in that time?

    LOL! You do realise that “U-turns” are generally associated with governments not oppositions!

    A U-turn in policy is invariable because the policy in question has failed and a change of direction is required, ie, a U-turn.

    Starmer’s policies fail even before they are implemented!

    Well at least Starmer himself seems to think they are either undesirable or not feasible!

    Edit: And yes, there have been many Tory government U-turns because, unsurprisingly, many of their policies have failed.

    What is Starmer’s excuse?

    ernielynch
    Full Member

    kimbers
    Full Member

    ill just leave this here

    Mick Lynch says voters must ‘grow up’ and see Starmer is only alternative

    It is probably worth also including this now:

    RMT leader Mick Lynch said the union would back Mr Corbyn should he run for his seat again as an independent.

    “We will support all sorts of people in this election, because we’re not affiliated,” Mr Lynch told the War on Want conference.

    He added: “We will support Labour candidates. We will support socialist candidates.

    “We will be supporting Jeremy Corbyn in the next election.”

    https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-68393822

    Me and Mick are like two Lynchs from the same pod 🙃

    rone
    Full Member

    Mick Lynch says voters must ‘grow up’ and see Starmer is only alternative

    I’m sure people don’t agree with Mick Lynch on everything.  Like his Brexit position for argument’s sake.

    This grown up thing is a real struggle. What’s grown up about conservative and regressive polices?  Sure it’s not particularly grown up to take continuation failing ideals?

    ernielynch
    Full Member

    Yeah but Lynch imo is pretty much right about most things and his comment on Starmer is no exception – there isn’t an alternative to Starmer. Which in itself does present a few issues.

    What is “grown up” is to accept that after the next general election the next prime minister will be either Rishi Sunak or Keir Starmer, those are the two alternatives, there is no point pretending that there are any others.

    Personally I hope that it will be Starmer and that, ideally, he has a two hundred plus majority.

    If you want to defeat neoliberalism then the very first thing you have to do is to make certain that the Tories are totally discredited in the eyes of the electorate.

    If a Labour government fails to satisfy the electorate using fundamentally the same policies as the Tories then the case will have to be made that the problem are the policies not their implementation.

    If the Tories narrowly loose the 2024 general election then they will probably win the 2029 general election.

    If after this year’s general election the Tories are left with a rump of about 80 MPs they are extremely unlikely to win the following general election. If the Tories are discredited and voters are not satisfied with Starmer’s Labour Party then people will start looking for what other alternatives there might be.

    It is the responsibility of those on the left to make certain that the answer isn’t “Nigel Farage”

    rone
    Full Member

    Yes but we’ve been pretty much forced to take this.

    Again, it’s short term thinking – I’d be more concerned about what comes 5-10 years from now.

    It’s a done deal – shit or moderately shit.

    That’s not appealing to me and call me old fashioned I still think MPs should earn your vote you shouldn’t just accept better the devil know.

    I will be voting Green as it aligns closest to my values. It’s as simple as that.

    Given we’ve suffered so much from the Tories – maybe if the Tories had another spell the country would be demanding a much better solution?

    Brutal but there you go.

    Me not voting Labour is unlikely to change the end result.

    What is “grown up” is to accept that after the next general election the next prime minister will be either Rishi Sunak or Keir Starmer, those are the two alternatives, there is no point pretending that there are any others

    No one is pretending there are alternatives necessarily but I would say ‘grown up’ – if I even want to go near that phrase is understanding why things are so bad and why we need to change it – not enabling the status quo.

    ransos
    Free Member

    It’s a done deal – shit or moderately shit.

    That’s not appealing to me and call me old fashioned I still think MPs should earn your vote you shouldn’t just accept better the devil know.

    I will be voting Green as it aligns closest to my values. It’s as simple as that.

    Exactly where I am. I refuse to endorse Starmer’s cynicism.

    ernielynch
    Full Member

    Again, it’s short term thinking – I’d be more concerned about what comes 5-10 years from now.

    Well that’s the whole point, I am thinking long term – I mentioned the general election in 2029.

    The reality is that you have to take one step at a time, you cannot immediately achieve your goal just because you are in a rush and impatient. Accepting this inalienable fact is the “grownup” thing to do.

    So step one is the defeat of the Tories. You simply cannot go straight to step two. If the Tories win the next general election (they won’t) then we will have to wait for another 5 years, which is a bit of a bugger if you are in a hurry.

    I would say ‘grown up’ – if I even want to go near that phrase is understanding why things are so bad and why we need to change it – not enabling the status quo

    Lynch obviously understands that, which why he isn’t backing the status quo. He is simply pointing out that the next prime minister can only be Rishi Sunak or Keir Starmer, but he is also backing independents as the bunch of administrative stalinists at the centre of the Labour Party who control much the selection process will not, if they can help it, tolerate socialist being selected as Labour candidates.

    And why Lynch says that he will back Jeremy Corbyn should he stand as an independent. There is little doubt that it will be very important to have people like Corbyn in the House of Commons to challenge Prime Minister Starmer, rather than leaving it all to the Tories challenging Starmer from a right-wing perspective.

    somafunk
    Full Member

    I missed the furore regarding “The Labour Files” when it came out so over the past few days I’ve watched it on YouTube and tried to follow along with checking out the main characters on my iPad, christ! – what a bunch of backstabbing lying ****. Going to have to try and find the panorama program somewhere as it’s not available on iPlayer.

    kelvin
    Full Member
    ernielynch
    Full Member

    I have only seen episode 4 of the Labour Files which focuses on the corrupt practices of the Labour Party in Croydon. I find the whole issue so deeply depressing and sickening, and not least because these people have seized control, that I would rather not dwell on just how rotten the Labour Party is internally.

    To add to my own personal disgust some of individuals mentioned in that episode I know personally from years ago when I was both socialising and working tirelessly in election campaigns with them.

    I have no regrets helping to turn a once Tory stronghold in Labour territory but I would never have been as motivated as I was had I known the end result.

    IMO after the next general election a Labour government will do nationally to the UK what Labour did locally in Croydon – betray ordinary working people. Especially as David Evans who was the lynchpin who established Labour rule in Croydon now has the ear of Keir Starmer.

    rone
    Full Member

    Is there any good news?

    ernielynch
    Full Member

    Yup

    rone
    Full Member

    I don’t want to see the state taking over the means of production and dictating to everyone what they should do and demanding loyalty to the red flag, but I do want to see socialist policies like those above implemented, as do many others who would never describe themselves as socialists.

    Agreed. We want the State to do the things only the state has the capacity to do well (the are many things!)

    State feeding a vibrant private sector is not controversial.

    A private sector draining the state for all its worth to the detriment of most of us is not what we want.

    kerley
    Free Member

    I don’t think many want that level of socialism and I have never seen a party (maybe the communist party) who is proposing to take over the means of production.  To me socialism is maintaining the primary objective of ensuring everything is for the good of society first.  You can have private sector but it has to be controlled and be doing whatever the government tells it to ensure it remains for the good of society and not for the good of itself only.

    tjagain
    Full Member

    To me socialism is maintaining the primary objective of ensuring everything is for the good of society first.

    That is not socialism in any way.  What you are proposing is liberalism ( not neolibralism)

    kerley
    Free Member

    Yes, not technically but something that could actually be done as we can hardly go for full means of production stuff can we.  Whether you own the production or just control it to the same level as if owned makes no difference to me.

    tjagain
    Full Member

    How about social democracy?  Thats a mixed economy with redistribution and management of markets?  better for the poor than liberalism due to the re distributive element and control of markets

    rone
    Full Member

    That is not socialism in any way.  What you are proposing is liberalism ( not neolibralism)

    I’d dispute this. Liberalism endorses free market principles and free enterprise  – that’s at odds with delivering outcomes for the good of society as a whole with only light touch intervention.

    Liberalism also doesn’t recognise the state as the creator of money.

    That doesn’t seem to me where Kerley is going.

    tjagain
    Full Member

    Jeepers.

    Some of you need to read some political philosophy.

    dazh
    Full Member

    How about social democracy?

    Absolutely lets have some of that. Not what Starmer and Reeves are offering though is it? They’re offering more neo-liberal race to the bottom austerity and socialism for the rich. What we have now isn’t social democracy, it’s oligarchy and kleptocracy, willingly supported by both main parties. At least the tories are honest about it, Labour on the other hand pretend to be on the side of working people.

    rone
    Full Member

    How about social democracy?  Thats a mixed economy with redistribution and management of markets?  better for the poor than liberalism due to the re distributive element and control of markets

    Because we’ve gone too far in one direction with markets and their poor outcomes.

    Social democracy is not going to fix the problems we currently have.

    How on earth do you address problems like lack of housing or inequality without the state spending big?

    Living in a dream world where we pretend that market economics just roll up and fix things is a huge issue for western democracies.  (Look at the evidence!)

    I think the next few years will continue to show us this appalling trajectory.

    tjagain
    Full Member

    Most of the self proclaimed “lefties” on here support either liberalism or social democracy – both centrist philosophies.  Not socialist

    Ernie is the only real leftie on here.  Good knowledge of the philosophies as well.  I disagree with many of his conclusions but its clear he has real knowledge of political philosophy

    Me I am a  dark green – which has much to share with socialism but also some major differences often arriving at the same place for different reasons

    kerley
    Free Member

    I see myself as a realistic/practical socialist.  With the outcomes of socialism but within the remits of how the world works in 2024.  Anything else is just dream world stuff.

    I don’t care what it is technically called but Labour were closer to it (nowhere near close enough) just a few years ago than they now are under Starmer

    tjagain
    Full Member

    Riiiiight!

    Social democrat or liberal then

    pondo
    Full Member

    What we have now isn’t social democracy, it’s oligarchy and kleptocracy, willingly supported by both main parties. At least the tories are honest about it

    They’re really not.

    kerley
    Free Member

    Riiiiight!

    Social democrat or liberal then

    potato potaato.  Social Democracy is a form of socialism and the form that I think could most realistically work given the constraints that are now firmly set.

    tjagain
    Full Member

    Social Democracy is a form of socialism

    No its not.  A bit of political philosophy might be handy

    ransos
    Free Member

    Oh good. TJ has read a book and now he’s going to bash everyone over the head with it.

    tjagain
    Full Member

    I’m just having a laugh at the folk proclaiming themselves to be socialists without actually understanding what socialism is.  Confusing liberalism or social democracy for socialism

    Nowt wrong with being a social democrat – its the most pervasive  form of political party across europe, its whats given the scandenavians such a high standard of living and such equal countries, its what has given Germany industrial co operation  not strife etc etc.  Its what the labour party has been for most of the last 50 years, its what the SNP are

    Its as much fun as anything else on this thread 🙂

    ransos
    Free Member

    I’m just having a laugh at the folk proclaiming themselves to be socialists without actually understanding what socialism is. agreeing with my definition of socialism.

    Ftfy.

    kelvin
    Full Member

    It’s all gone Humpty Dumpty.

    [ Ooof… looked for a nice image to remind people of the quote from Alice in Wonderland on the meaning of words… and it’s really been picked up by conspiracy theory nuts, hasn’t it… switch off the internet… go re-read the book.]

    tjagain
    Full Member

    Ransos – its not my definition – its the definition of those who first outlined it.   🙂

    ransos
    Free Member

    The key theorists don’t agree on everything.

Viewing 40 posts - 21,121 through 21,160 (of 21,646 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.