13 Dec 2019 18:51
Genuine question - Why is it better to try and achieve left-wing aims from outside the EU, rather than from within it?
Isn't a preferred aspiration to have a democratic domino-effect or even genuine revolution within the existing political union structure, to facilitate legislation meeting those aims universally across a huge area?
Not sure how we could ever hope to stand up to corporate/capitalist interests outside the EU, and I accept that the EU seeks to serve these interests (but to a lesser extent than the Tories) at the moment.
13 Dec 2019 19:53
Lexit lost BTW. I wasn't trying to gloat.
When Greece elected Syriza and wanted to default on loans from the EU they enforced strict sanctions and austerity. Nationalisation is part of social democratic reforms and the EU can block any attempt at nationalising any industry.
The idea of Fortress Europe (the restriction of the freedom of movement that has killed thousands) has legitimised the spread of xenophobic racist parties across the EU (Italy, Hungary, Poland, Germany, Netherlands etc..). Coast guards waiting in a boat next to drowning people have to be given the clear to save them or be faced with prison.
The EU is a neoliberal institution whose main purpose is to protect trade. We could have left with labour in power and nationalised things but nope.
Standing up to capitalism has to be international and must come the bottom up. It can't be done incrementally once every 5 years. We don't have time. A new system is needed. Uprisings around the globe, present and future, must put forward revolutionary demands.
posted 13 Dec 2019 21:25, edited 13 Dec 2019 21:25
Corbyn was always good as a campaigner from the peripherals for decades. He was never a natural leader unfortunately, used only as a vessel by lansman/mcdonell/mccluskey to shift the labour far left in reaction to new labour and lite left Ed. Worked briefly in engaging new members and younger voters.
Sadly poor media performances, right wing bias in the media, and over course the perception of not tackling anti semitism quick enough, dithering on brexit as a natural eurosceptic, purging a more pluralistic view, ended in the downfall, despite popular policies.
I don't think there will be labour government for at least ten years unless Boris seriously fucks up.
With pidcock, a supposed heir to corbyn now gone, the pool narrows. Jess Philips? Rayner? Long-Bailey? Potentials, but don't think they've got it to defeat the tories. I think the only way will now be a shift to a more central, open position if they're serious about not going into total oblivion.
13 Dec 2019 22:37
Thank fuck Timdot is back to save us from Fudge's retardation.
13 Dec 2019 23:45
like no ones ever been a stupid teenager
13 Dec 2019 23:49
what I really like though are public spending policies based on utopian, undeliverable, pie in the sky 'principles'. The naivety running through society, particularly through social media, is incredible.
13 Dec 2019 23:58
Bit rude of me to use a personal post from a long time ago to make a point, I apologise. I think the above re spending applies to both main parties! Labour suffered more for it though.
posted 14 Dec 2019 00:21, edited 14 Dec 2019 00:21
national debt is still massive as a percentage of a GDP, clearly in part a result of horrific Labour financial policy (and bloated, inefficient public services), along with macro factors, but the rationale from the left is spend, spend, spend. I don't believe anybody wants massive inequality and everyone wants good public services, but sense seems to have gone out the window.
there's still a massive witch hunt on wealth, profit is a bad word, but the incredible thing that many seem to ignore is the massive reliance on very few to contribute SO much in terms of tax revenues. there's a relatively fine line between living in a somewhat free and hopefully prosperous country, contributing and paying for the privilege of doing so, and it being so financially onerous that it's pointless to stay. ambition and entrepreneurship should be encouraged, not punished. the left always speak of the wealthiest paying 'a bit' more and I think to some extent, there wouldn't be a huge amount of resistance towards this, but a small increase wouldn't touch the sides. I also believe that regardless of taxation levels, it would always be a 'bit more', a constant chipping away.
I really don't know what the answer to the massive social issues may be. We are restricted by reality and vaguely responsible spending. Resources are finite and aside from economic growth/increased GDP leading to higher tax revenues and the possibility to borrow more by maintaining a similar ratio, I've got no idea what can be done.
14 Dec 2019 11:20
The bottom line is labour need to root out the momentum and Antisemite element - hard to do as they also rely on the Muslim block vote.
Keir Starmer should be the next leader - look at the alternatives….. my god.