The EU Referendum - Thursday 23 June (with voting poll)

Munchkin wrote:

Nico the gman wrote:Whether people like it or not the country voted to leave the EU and I don't think there's a cat in hells chance of a 2nd Referendum, those who did fail to vote and wanted to remain have in my opinion no argument.

I don't think a 2nd referendum will happen. I do think a 2nd referendum would vote Remain, even if the exact same voters come out.

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:

Duty281 wrote:

Munchkin wrote:

Duty281 wrote:

Munchkin wrote:

Duty281 wrote:Labour NEC votes 17/15 (in favour) for a secret ballot on whether or not Corbyn should be automatically nominated. Corbyn apparently refusing to leave.

Oh dear, oh dear, oh dear.

He was actually refusing to leave the NEC room in which the ballot was held  Eventually he was persuaded to leave. Silly man.

Looks like his only chance now is to get the 50-odd MPs/MEPs he needs to get on the ballot paper.

It does appear his only chance, but I am reading of possible court action if he excluded from running.

And if Corbyn did go down that road, it would truly highlight his desire to put himself before his party.

Principles, yeah!

Don't think the two hundred thousand odd members that supported Corbyn will be too happy about the shaft...

He had to go but surely they could have done it better...

Heaven knows why May is ruling out an election..

Corbyn will lose the center votes needed for a Labour win.......and the new leader will lose the left ones needed..

Labour is a joke..

Munchkin wrote:

lostinwales wrote:

Munchkin wrote:

lostinwales wrote:

Munchkin wrote:

Duty281 wrote:Labour NEC votes 17/15 (in favour) for a secret ballot on whether or not Corbyn should be automatically nominated. Corbyn apparently refusing to leave.

Oh dear, oh dear, oh dear.

He was actually refusing to leave the NEC room in which the ballot was held  Eventually he was persuaded to leave. Silly man.

We have been thinking that a chunk of the Labour party might split away to form a SDP II party. Way things are going we might find that Corbyn breaks away instead

To be honest I think a split is probably the best outcome, but much better that Corbyn quits to form his own party. Labour needs a purge.

From that link of yours it does seem as if JC is going to be history. Cue Corbynistas going into a frenzy

They will rage for a while, no doubt. I really don't like Momentum, or any of the old Loony Left. With a bit of luck this might be the time to get rid of them.

Duty281 wrote:

Munchkin wrote:

Duty281 wrote:

Munchkin wrote:

Duty281 wrote:Labour NEC votes 17/15 (in favour) for a secret ballot on whether or not Corbyn should be automatically nominated. Corbyn apparently refusing to leave.

Oh dear, oh dear, oh dear.

He was actually refusing to leave the NEC room in which the ballot was held  Eventually he was persuaded to leave. Silly man.

Looks like his only chance now is to get the 50-odd MPs/MEPs he needs to get on the ballot paper.

It does appear his only chance, but I am reading of possible court action if he excluded from running.

And if Corbyn did go down that road, it would truly highlight his desire to put himself before his party.

Principles, yeah!

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:

Munchkin wrote:

lostinwales wrote:

Munchkin wrote:

lostinwales wrote:

Munchkin wrote:

Duty281 wrote:Labour NEC votes 17/15 (in favour) for a secret ballot on whether or not Corbyn should be automatically nominated. Corbyn apparently refusing to leave.

Oh dear, oh dear, oh dear.

He was actually refusing to leave the NEC room in which the ballot was held  Eventually he was persuaded to leave. Silly man.

We have been thinking that a chunk of the Labour party might split away to form a SDP II party. Way things are going we might find that Corbyn breaks away instead

To be honest I think a split is probably the best outcome, but much better that Corbyn quits to form his own party. Labour needs a purge.

From that link of yours it does seem as if JC is going to be history. Cue Corbynistas going into a frenzy

They will rage for a while, no doubt. I really don't like Momentum, or any of the old Loony Left. With a bit of luck this might be the time to get rid of them.

You can't win without left wing votes......So why have contempt for people that vote and work for your party ??

I think most left wing people mean well and their hearts are in the right place and they probably go around knocking on doors for Labour while you're sat on your arse....

I don't want a left wing government the ideology is stuck in the past...Center is where the key to power is..

But come on....

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Blair's Labour party 1997-2001 was great....Since then Labour has been a sack of crap.....

"Labour as we have known it"...

What is Labour as we have known it.............Illegal wars...Arselicking the rich.....Cash for honors....£200 winter payments to pensioners in election years.....

Corbyn's might be crap but it wasn't so great before now was it ??

Before we all get misty eyed..

Labour isn't going to be a force again until the left learn to put up with the right and the right learns to put up with the left.....Heart goes out to the ones in the center..

Duty281 wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:

Duty281 wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:

Duty281 wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:

Duty281 wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:On the political spectrum. And I said pretty far right. Why do you believe it's meaningless? Presumably you consider only some part of Labour vile? You surely find similar true for Tories, UKIP, BNP etc?

Yes, I get that you mean on the political spectrum, but what does 'pretty far-right' mean? Can you define it?

Left and right-wing, to me, are meaningless labels because they indicate a state of static and rigid thought in a world of fluid thought. All people, and parties, have opinions and ideas that are considered 'left-wing' and 'right-wing' simultaneously.

And no, we're rather talking at cross-purposes. There are indeed a gaggle of idiots in every party, who say or do stupid things, but it is not to that which I'm referring when I call Labour vile. The BNP are of course vile, in every sense, but are a nothing party.

I'm sure far brighter people than me have written what they define it as if you need to look it up. You're not left wing at all I would suggest, hence why you describe Labour as vile.

I don't need to look it up, I'm trying to get an understanding of what you mean when you say I'm 'pretty far-right'.

To name a few, I support immigration, the NHS, a multi-ethnic society, the minimum wage, democracy, freedom of speech - are these 'far-right' values?

Ha, yeah.

Exactly - what you think isn't backed up the evidence. Sorry to disappoint you.

No disappointment, i'm sure you'd like to think you're not like all the other boys but you're right wing to the core. Not sure why you even pretend not to be?

And I ask once again for your definition of this strange 'right-wing' thing, and your evidence for how I fit into said bracket?

Or are you just throwing around tired phrases without knowing their meaning?

Munchkin wrote:

I have no sympathy for Corbyn. He is a man I really don't trust, and honestly believe he could destroy the Party if not removed. There was a vote of no confidence and, although that vote doesn't have the teeth to remove him, he should have stepped aside on principle. Maybe there are others pulling his strings?

No 7&1/2 wrote:

Duty281 wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:

Duty281 wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:

Duty281 wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:

Duty281 wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:On the political spectrum. And I said pretty far right. Why do you believe it's meaningless? Presumably you consider only some part of Labour vile? You surely find similar true for Tories, UKIP, BNP etc?

Yes, I get that you mean on the political spectrum, but what does 'pretty far-right' mean? Can you define it?

Left and right-wing, to me, are meaningless labels because they indicate a state of static and rigid thought in a world of fluid thought. All people, and parties, have opinions and ideas that are considered 'left-wing' and 'right-wing' simultaneously.

And no, we're rather talking at cross-purposes. There are indeed a gaggle of idiots in every party, who say or do stupid things, but it is not to that which I'm referring when I call Labour vile. The BNP are of course vile, in every sense, but are a nothing party.

I'm sure far brighter people than me have written what they define it as if you need to look it up. You're not left wing at all I would suggest, hence why you describe Labour as vile.

I don't need to look it up, I'm trying to get an understanding of what you mean when you say I'm 'pretty far-right'.

To name a few, I support immigration, the NHS, a multi-ethnic society, the minimum wage, democracy, freedom of speech - are these 'far-right' values?

Ha, yeah.

Exactly - what you think isn't backed up the evidence. Sorry to disappoint you.

No disappointment, i'm sure you'd like to think you're not like all the other boys but you're right wing to the core. Not sure why you even pretend not to be?

And I ask once again for your definition of this strange 'right-wing' thing, and your evidence for how I fit into said bracket?

Or are you just throwing around tired phrases without knowing their meaning?

No need to be ashamed; you're UKIP and proud.

Munchkin wrote:

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Blair's Labour party 1997-2001 was great....Since then Labour has been a sack of crap.....

"Labour as we have known it"...

What is Labour as we have known it.............Illegal wars...Arselicking the rich.....Cash for honors....£200 winter payments to pensioners in election years.....

Corbyn's might be crap but it wasn't so great before now was it ??

Before we all get misty eyed..

Labour isn't going to be a force again until the left learn to put up with the right and the right learns to put up with the left.....Heart goes out to the ones in the center..

Labour as we have known it would have been just left of centre. Blair being an war mongering ass doesn't change the political philosophy. Even a Labour under Milliband would be a far better alternative than this Corbyn shambles.

SecretFly wrote:

Munchkin wrote:

I have no sympathy for Corbyn. He is a man I really don't trust, and honestly believe he could destroy the Party if not removed. There was a vote of no confidence and, although that vote doesn't have the teeth to remove him, he should have stepped aside on principle. Maybe there are others pulling his strings?

Corbyn standing aside on principle would mean for him, and those that support him, that he'd be handing the keys of Labour back to New Labour - a ideology that has taken a nose dive in latter years.  To emphasise the point, old 'far-left' Labour people view New Labour in the very same light as the New Labour view them - dangerous, divisive, a threat to Labour values, betrayers of natural Labour voters.

So, on principle alone, it wouldn't be much of a principle for Corbyn to surrender to New Labour, a product he despises possibly more than the Conservatives themselves.

The only true solution is a break-up - and then a legal battle to decide which side gets to hold onto the Name.  That in itself wouldn't be a smooth ride either, as neither side would be held to dropping the name and I'm sure it would appear twice in Elections with perhaps a different font to distinguish one from the other.

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:

Munchkin wrote:

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Blair's Labour party 1997-2001 was great....Since then Labour has been a sack of crap.....

"Labour as we have known it"...

What is Labour as we have known it.............Illegal wars...Arselicking the rich.....Cash for honors....£200 winter payments to pensioners in election years.....

Corbyn's might be crap but it wasn't so great before now was it ??

Before we all get misty eyed..

Labour isn't going to be a force again until the left learn to put up with the right and the right learns to put up with the left.....Heart goes out to the ones in the center..

Labour as we have known it would have been just left of centre. Blair being an war mongering ass doesn't change the political philosophy. Even a Labour under Milliband would be a far better alternative than this Corbyn shambles.

I voted for Ed.......But not with any excitement.

Voted for Labour since I was allowed to in 97.......But I held my nose to do it in 2005.....

Like I said Blair 1997/2001 was a great government.....Shame it lost its way.....

Like I said i'm sorry to see the internecine warfare in Labour.............Seems to me the left hates the right of the party more than the Tories.....and the right hates the left more than the Tories.....

Shouldn't be the case...........Sad..

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Farage was UKIP it's finished now....Probably why Farage has done a runner......

My guess is in 4/5 years time Farage will be a Tory mp.....

Munchkin wrote:

The term 'New Labour' is a bit misleading, I think. New Labour was a centre Party, not unlike others before them. The near personality cult surrounding Blair is what turned transformed Labour into New Labour. Hence 'Blairites'. It was the spin that convinced. New Labour died the moment Blair was replaced, and those described as 'Blairites' within the Party are really only those who either served under Blair or hold a centre left position. Centre is not the opposite end of far Left.

SecretFly wrote:

Munchkin wrote:

The term 'New Labour' is a bit misleading, I think. New Labour was a centre Party, not unlike others before them. The near personality cult surrounding Blair is what turned transformed Labour into New Labour. Hence 'Blairites'. It was the spin that convinced. New Labour died the moment Blair was replaced, and those described as 'Blairites' within the Party are really only those who either served under Blair or hold a centre left position. Centre is not the opposite end of far Left.

To a person like Corbyn, it very much is.  It's perceptions - and perceptions are the only ones that matter either in membership or the Party.  The Party have their views of both Corbyn and the new £3 members.... so again, nobody can say that Centrist Labour own the Labour brand.  It's just perceptions and which perception wins.

Munchkin wrote:Do the majority of the Labour vote want a Union controlled leader? I wouldn't think so.

SecretFly wrote:This is why it's quite a process happening in the UK right now and why it is so interesting to observe.

Corbyn, this cult figure, this guy no mainstream politician or media darlings can fathom, is doing some important work - he's exposing the true blood in those that are coming out of the woodwork now with such deep hatred in their voices when talking about him.  Just heard Blair's once Director of Political Operations, John McTernan, speak with such venom.  The rage that these guys have that are usually so familiar with getting their way and imposing their will - the inner fury that they can't force down a popular uprising - I think it's important that so many 'controller' type enforcer politicians and behind-the-scenes power brokers feel now totally powerless.

There truly is a revolutionary mood in the world - normal conventions are under pressure because for too long they've cruised on smugness.  Humility is an emotion many of them will have to re-learn if things are going to be negotiated to a satisfactory conclusion for everyone.  Maybe some are beyond even knowing how to seek out that emotion or even sensing the need for it.

SecretFly wrote:

Munchkin wrote:Do the majority of the Labour vote want a Union controlled leader? I wouldn't think so.

So they won't vote for him.  This is the point I keep coming back to.  There are other parties with policies and philosophies that can handle new disenchanted Labour voters.  The voters still exist - the Party is a thing, that can go on existing or disappear.  The voters will still have Parties to vote for.

But of course, the Labour Party also want their cake and eating it too because they want the Unions involved in funding them..... they'll take the largesse but snub the 'advice'.  They ain't pure as the driven snow, Munch

Munchkin wrote:

SecretFly wrote:This is why it's quite a process happening in the UK right now and why it is so interesting to observe.

Corbyn, this cult figure, this guy no mainstream politician or media darlings can fathom, is doing some important work - he's exposing the true blood in those that are coming out of the woodwork now with such deep hatred in their voices when talking about him.  Just heard Blair's once Director of Political Operations, John McTernan, speak with such venom.  The rage that these guys have that are usually so familiar with getting their way and imposing their will - the inner fury that they can't force down a popular uprising - I think it's important that so many 'controller' type enforcer politicians and behind-the-scenes power brokers feel now totally powerless.

There truly is a revolutionary mood in the world - normal conventions are under pressure because for too long they've cruised on smugness.  Humility is an emotion many of them will have to re-learn if things are going to be negotiated to a satisfactory conclusion for everyone.  Maybe some are beyond even knowing how to seek out that emotion or even sensing the need for it.

It's what's coming out of the woodwork that is the real concern, and I'm not talking about Labours MP's. I think the real concern is a militant Left. Not something the UK needs right now in such uncertain times. To put another angle on it; the far-right is rising in France and Germany. Now they might well challenge the smugness of typically centrist parties, but is it desirable? I mean, they might do a good job in getting rid of muslamic ray guns, but not so much the economy.

Maybe there is a rage against the likes of Corbyn, and maybe that rage is reasonable.

Munchkin wrote:

SecretFly wrote:

Munchkin wrote:Do the majority of the Labour vote want a Union controlled leader? I wouldn't think so.

So they won't vote for him.  This is the point I keep coming back to.  There are other parties with policies and philosophies that can handle new disenchanted Labour voters.  The voters still exist - the Party is a thing, that can go on existing or disappear.  The voters will still have Parties to vote for.

But of course, the Labour Party also want their cake and eating it too because they want the Unions involved in funding them..... they'll take the largesse but snub the 'advice'.  They ain't pure as the driven snow, Munch

They are not pure, but they might not have a choice. We are already seeing Labours members of parliament being bullied. The future?

SecretFly wrote:

Munchkin wrote:

SecretFly wrote:This is why it's quite a process happening in the UK right now and why it is so interesting to observe.

Corbyn, this cult figure, this guy no mainstream politician or media darlings can fathom, is doing some important work - he's exposing the true blood in those that are coming out of the woodwork now with such deep hatred in their voices when talking about him.  Just heard Blair's once Director of Political Operations, John McTernan, speak with such venom.  The rage that these guys have that are usually so familiar with getting their way and imposing their will - the inner fury that they can't force down a popular uprising - I think it's important that so many 'controller' type enforcer politicians and behind-the-scenes power brokers feel now totally powerless.

There truly is a revolutionary mood in the world - normal conventions are under pressure because for too long they've cruised on smugness.  Humility is an emotion many of them will have to re-learn if things are going to be negotiated to a satisfactory conclusion for everyone.  Maybe some are beyond even knowing how to seek out that emotion or even sensing the need for it.

It's what's coming out of the woodwork that is the real concern, and I'm not talking about Labours MP's. I think the real concern is a militant Left. Not something the UK needs right now in such uncertain times. To put another angle on it; the far-right is rising in France and Germany. Now they might well challenge the smugness of typically centrist parties, but is it desirable? I mean, they might do a good job in getting rid of muslamic ray guns, but not so much the economy.

Maybe there is a rage against the likes of Corbyn, and maybe that rage is reasonable.

I couldn't share that view, Munch.  The hate and vitriol is not one way.  
And as I say, the hate and vitriol only comes out when under pressure - now the nice clean 'Centrists' are under pressure and we're seeing what they now look like too when spittle comes from their mouths and blood fires in their eyes - it's as ugly a sight as a National Fronter.  Zealots and zealots - right, left or centre.  I'm a Eurosceptic zealot.  We all start shouting when the threats become real to us.

The 'Centrists' could claim to be civilised as long as things were going their way.  Now they ain't so cute.  They even question the democracy of their own systems of finding a Leader and keeping one.  From day one they planned a coup.  Everyone knows it has nothing to do with the Brexit result.  Brexit was the new excuse to offload a Leader that the members voted for and the politicians never wanted.  
It proves that the Party (and not just Labour) want to dictate policy to the masses rather than accept the democratic wishes of the people they represent.  "Thanks Labour members for voting for us but in order to get into power we're now going to have to champion things you're not going to like in order to attract people who currently vote for Conservatives.  Please be patient and obedient - we do this for you - kinda"

Social media, munch - it means even the uneducated aren't waiting for the 'official channels' to give them the news or to help promote that message of obedience to the goodness of Parliamentary democracy.  That's a bluff - democracy is with the people.  They're the bosses.  Arrogance seeps from all angles of politics - left, right and centre.

Duty281 wrote:Pah, it will cost £25 to be a registered supporter this time around!

I like ya, Jezza, but not this much. Besides which, Angela Eagle and Owen Smith are equally hopeless.

Spoiler:

Munchkin wrote:

Duty281 wrote:Pah, it will cost £25 to be a registered supporter this time around!

I like ya, Jezza, but not this much. Besides which, Angela Eagle and Owen Smith are equally hopeless.

Think it will put a lot of people off. Will the Unions stump up the money?

SecretFly wrote:

Munchkin wrote:

SecretFly wrote:

Munchkin wrote:Do the majority of the Labour vote want a Union controlled leader? I wouldn't think so.

So they won't vote for him.  This is the point I keep coming back to.  There are other parties with policies and philosophies that can handle new disenchanted Labour voters.  The voters still exist - the Party is a thing, that can go on existing or disappear.  The voters will still have Parties to vote for.

But of course, the Labour Party also want their cake and eating it too because they want the Unions involved in funding them..... they'll take the largesse but snub the 'advice'.  They ain't pure as the driven snow, Munch

They are not pure, but they might not have a choice. We are already seeing Labours members of parliament being bullied. The future?

If those politicians feel that the Unions have regained power and if they trust their instincts that their electorate in their constituencies are against that renewed takeover then let them defect to less leftist militant Parties and take their electorate with them?  The dilemma is simply politicians that fear for their jobs but don't trust their electorate to understand the need to defect out of what they'd now call a poisonous Party.  The dilemma is that the politicians want to hold firm to an umbilical cord called Labour even though they seem now to be aliens within the that Party.  You're only bullied if you hang around and accept it.  Have the courage to get the hell out.

Munchkin wrote:

Which less militant leftest Parties? Labour politicians will have dedicated their lives to the Party. Why should they leave when the can actively oppose the hard left from within?

It's far too simplistic to say that the dilemma is simply politicians fearing for their jobs. You have to remember that those who 'fear for their jobs' resigned. It's much more than fearing for their jobs, if they fear that at all. Many genuinely don't trust Corbyn as a leader.

Who seems alien to the Party? It isn't those in opposition to Corbyn. It is Corbyn and his cronies that are out of place. Fine when these guys were hanging around the fringes. Not so fine when they up front and leading, and only because Labour was weak on alternatives.

To run because you're bullied can be considered weak. Not a quality I would want in any politician representing me.

Munchkin wrote:

SecretFly wrote:

Munchkin wrote:

SecretFly wrote:This is why it's quite a process happening in the UK right now and why it is so interesting to observe.

Corbyn, this cult figure, this guy no mainstream politician or media darlings can fathom, is doing some important work - he's exposing the true blood in those that are coming out of the woodwork now with such deep hatred in their voices when talking about him.  Just heard Blair's once Director of Political Operations, John McTernan, speak with such venom.  The rage that these guys have that are usually so familiar with getting their way and imposing their will - the inner fury that they can't force down a popular uprising - I think it's important that so many 'controller' type enforcer politicians and behind-the-scenes power brokers feel now totally powerless.

There truly is a revolutionary mood in the world - normal conventions are under pressure because for too long they've cruised on smugness.  Humility is an emotion many of them will have to re-learn if things are going to be negotiated to a satisfactory conclusion for everyone.  Maybe some are beyond even knowing how to seek out that emotion or even sensing the need for it.

It's what's coming out of the woodwork that is the real concern, and I'm not talking about Labours MP's. I think the real concern is a militant Left. Not something the UK needs right now in such uncertain times. To put another angle on it; the far-right is rising in France and Germany. Now they might well challenge the smugness of typically centrist parties, but is it desirable? I mean, they might do a good job in getting rid of muslamic ray guns, but not so much the economy.

Maybe there is a rage against the likes of Corbyn, and maybe that rage is reasonable.

I couldn't share that view, Munch.  The hate and vitriol is not one way.  
And as I say, the hate and vitriol only comes out when under pressure - now the nice clean 'Centrists' are under pressure and we're seeing what they now look like too when spittle comes from their mouths and blood fires in their eyes - it's as ugly a sight as a National Fronter.  Zealots and zealots - right, left or centre.  I'm a Eurosceptic zealot.  We all start shouting when the threats become real to us.

The 'Centrists' could claim to be civilised as long as things were going their way.  Now they ain't so cute.  They even question the democracy of their own systems of finding a Leader and keeping one.  From day one they planned a coup.  Everyone knows it has nothing to do with the Brexit result.  Brexit was the new excuse to offload a Leader that the members voted for and the politicians never wanted.  
It proves that the Party (and not just Labour) want to dictate policy to the masses rather than accept the democratic wishes of the people they represent.  "Thanks Labour members for voting for us but in order to get into power we're now going to have to champion things you're not going to like in order to attract people who currently vote for Conservatives.  Please be patient and obedient - we do this for you - kinda"

Social media, munch - it means even the uneducated aren't waiting for the 'official channels' to give them the news or to help promote that message of obedience to the goodness of Parliamentary democracy.  That's a bluff - democracy is with the people.  They're the bosses.  Arrogance seeps from all angles of politics - left, right and centre.

Personally I haven't heard all that much vitriol coming out from centrist parties, here or abroad. Concentrating on the froth is a distraction though. What is important is which side is going to benefit society the more? I don't care about the spittle. I do care about what is best for the economy and general quality of life.

I've been known to get angry at idiots. Being angry at them doesn't make me one of them.

Democracy is with the people, but the people can be mislead. We have plenty of precedent to support that. A whole nation can be lead by the nose into making the wrong choices.

A Government will usually try and implement the mandate they were elected on. Someone always loses but that's how democracy works. True, some will try and slide in policy not included in the manifesto but, even then, it will go to a vote of democratically elected MP's.

I am a big admirer of social media, but it can be as misleading as it is enlightening. I have seen plenty of lies accepted as gospel. Minds led astray by activists engaged in propaganda.

Duty281 wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:

Duty281 wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:

Duty281 wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:

Duty281 wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:

Duty281 wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:On the political spectrum. And I said pretty far right. Why do you believe it's meaningless? Presumably you consider only some part of Labour vile? You surely find similar true for Tories, UKIP, BNP etc?

Yes, I get that you mean on the political spectrum, but what does 'pretty far-right' mean? Can you define it?

Left and right-wing, to me, are meaningless labels because they indicate a state of static and rigid thought in a world of fluid thought. All people, and parties, have opinions and ideas that are considered 'left-wing' and 'right-wing' simultaneously.

And no, we're rather talking at cross-purposes. There are indeed a gaggle of idiots in every party, who say or do stupid things, but it is not to that which I'm referring when I call Labour vile. The BNP are of course vile, in every sense, but are a nothing party.

I'm sure far brighter people than me have written what they define it as if you need to look it up. You're not left wing at all I would suggest, hence why you describe Labour as vile.

I don't need to look it up, I'm trying to get an understanding of what you mean when you say I'm 'pretty far-right'.

To name a few, I support immigration, the NHS, a multi-ethnic society, the minimum wage, democracy, freedom of speech - are these 'far-right' values?

Ha, yeah.

Exactly - what you think isn't backed up the evidence. Sorry to disappoint you.

No disappointment, i'm sure you'd like to think you're not like all the other boys but you're right wing to the core. Not sure why you even pretend not to be?

And I ask once again for your definition of this strange 'right-wing' thing, and your evidence for how I fit into said bracket?

Or are you just throwing around tired phrases without knowing their meaning?

No need to be ashamed; you're UKIP and proud.

Thank you for proving my point beyond all doubt.

lostinwales wrote:

Munchkin wrote:

SecretFly wrote:

Munchkin wrote:

SecretFly wrote:This is why it's quite a process happening in the UK right now and why it is so interesting to observe.

Corbyn, this cult figure, this guy no mainstream politician or media darlings can fathom, is doing some important work - he's exposing the true blood in those that are coming out of the woodwork now with such deep hatred in their voices when talking about him.  Just heard Blair's once Director of Political Operations, John McTernan, speak with such venom.  The rage that these guys have that are usually so familiar with getting their way and imposing their will - the inner fury that they can't force down a popular uprising - I think it's important that so many 'controller' type enforcer politicians and behind-the-scenes power brokers feel now totally powerless.

There truly is a revolutionary mood in the world - normal conventions are under pressure because for too long they've cruised on smugness.  Humility is an emotion many of them will have to re-learn if things are going to be negotiated to a satisfactory conclusion for everyone.  Maybe some are beyond even knowing how to seek out that emotion or even sensing the need for it.

It's what's coming out of the woodwork that is the real concern, and I'm not talking about Labours MP's. I think the real concern is a militant Left. Not something the UK needs right now in such uncertain times. To put another angle on it; the far-right is rising in France and Germany. Now they might well challenge the smugness of typically centrist parties, but is it desirable? I mean, they might do a good job in getting rid of muslamic ray guns, but not so much the economy.

Maybe there is a rage against the likes of Corbyn, and maybe that rage is reasonable.

I couldn't share that view, Munch.  The hate and vitriol is not one way.  
And as I say, the hate and vitriol only comes out when under pressure - now the nice clean 'Centrists' are under pressure and we're seeing what they now look like too when spittle comes from their mouths and blood fires in their eyes - it's as ugly a sight as a National Fronter.  Zealots and zealots - right, left or centre.  I'm a Eurosceptic zealot.  We all start shouting when the threats become real to us.

The 'Centrists' could claim to be civilised as long as things were going their way.  Now they ain't so cute.  They even question the democracy of their own systems of finding a Leader and keeping one.  From day one they planned a coup.  Everyone knows it has nothing to do with the Brexit result.  Brexit was the new excuse to offload a Leader that the members voted for and the politicians never wanted.  
It proves that the Party (and not just Labour) want to dictate policy to the masses rather than accept the democratic wishes of the people they represent.  "Thanks Labour members for voting for us but in order to get into power we're now going to have to champion things you're not going to like in order to attract people who currently vote for Conservatives.  Please be patient and obedient - we do this for you - kinda"

Social media, munch - it means even the uneducated aren't waiting for the 'official channels' to give them the news or to help promote that message of obedience to the goodness of Parliamentary democracy.  That's a bluff - democracy is with the people.  They're the bosses.  Arrogance seeps from all angles of politics - left, right and centre.

Personally I haven't heard all that much vitriol coming out from centrist parties, here or abroad. Concentrating on the froth is a distraction though. What is important is which side is going to benefit society the more? I don't care about the spittle. I do care about what is best for the economy and general quality of life.

I've been known to get angry at idiots. Being angry at them doesn't make me one of them.

Democracy is with the people, but the people can be mislead. We have plenty of precedent to support that. A whole nation can be lead by the nose into making the wrong choices.

A Government will usually try and implement the mandate they were elected on. Someone always loses but that's how democracy works. True, some will try and slide in policy not included in the manifesto but, even then, it will go to a vote of democratically elected MP's.

I am a big admirer of social media, but it can be as misleading as it is enlightening. I have seen plenty of lies accepted as gospel. Minds led astray by activists engaged in propaganda.

Its worth adding that with Corbyn they have tried being nice. First man up (Benn junior) told him to go and in traditional fashion the messenger was shot. Since then its been downhill all the way and you can understand it if there is a lot of frustration.

I saw someone making a point about Corbyn that the fact that there is a new PM seems to have passed him by altogether. This internal fight is more important, and has always been more important than, you know, his actual job.

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:

lostinwales wrote:

Munchkin wrote:

SecretFly wrote:

Munchkin wrote:

SecretFly wrote:This is why it's quite a process happening in the UK right now and why it is so interesting to observe.

Corbyn, this cult figure, this guy no mainstream politician or media darlings can fathom, is doing some important work - he's exposing the true blood in those that are coming out of the woodwork now with such deep hatred in their voices when talking about him.  Just heard Blair's once Director of Political Operations, John McTernan, speak with such venom.  The rage that these guys have that are usually so familiar with getting their way and imposing their will - the inner fury that they can't force down a popular uprising - I think it's important that so many 'controller' type enforcer politicians and behind-the-scenes power brokers feel now totally powerless.

There truly is a revolutionary mood in the world - normal conventions are under pressure because for too long they've cruised on smugness.  Humility is an emotion many of them will have to re-learn if things are going to be negotiated to a satisfactory conclusion for everyone.  Maybe some are beyond even knowing how to seek out that emotion or even sensing the need for it.

It's what's coming out of the woodwork that is the real concern, and I'm not talking about Labours MP's. I think the real concern is a militant Left. Not something the UK needs right now in such uncertain times. To put another angle on it; the far-right is rising in France and Germany. Now they might well challenge the smugness of typically centrist parties, but is it desirable? I mean, they might do a good job in getting rid of muslamic ray guns, but not so much the economy.

Maybe there is a rage against the likes of Corbyn, and maybe that rage is reasonable.

I couldn't share that view, Munch.  The hate and vitriol is not one way.  
And as I say, the hate and vitriol only comes out when under pressure - now the nice clean 'Centrists' are under pressure and we're seeing what they now look like too when spittle comes from their mouths and blood fires in their eyes - it's as ugly a sight as a National Fronter.  Zealots and zealots - right, left or centre.  I'm a Eurosceptic zealot.  We all start shouting when the threats become real to us.

The 'Centrists' could claim to be civilised as long as things were going their way.  Now they ain't so cute.  They even question the democracy of their own systems of finding a Leader and keeping one.  From day one they planned a coup.  Everyone knows it has nothing to do with the Brexit result.  Brexit was the new excuse to offload a Leader that the members voted for and the politicians never wanted.  
It proves that the Party (and not just Labour) want to dictate policy to the masses rather than accept the democratic wishes of the people they represent.  "Thanks Labour members for voting for us but in order to get into power we're now going to have to champion things you're not going to like in order to attract people who currently vote for Conservatives.  Please be patient and obedient - we do this for you - kinda"

Social media, munch - it means even the uneducated aren't waiting for the 'official channels' to give them the news or to help promote that message of obedience to the goodness of Parliamentary democracy.  That's a bluff - democracy is with the people.  They're the bosses.  Arrogance seeps from all angles of politics - left, right and centre.

Personally I haven't heard all that much vitriol coming out from centrist parties, here or abroad. Concentrating on the froth is a distraction though. What is important is which side is going to benefit society the more? I don't care about the spittle. I do care about what is best for the economy and general quality of life.

I've been known to get angry at idiots. Being angry at them doesn't make me one of them.

Democracy is with the people, but the people can be mislead. We have plenty of precedent to support that. A whole nation can be lead by the nose into making the wrong choices.

A Government will usually try and implement the mandate they were elected on. Someone always loses but that's how democracy works. True, some will try and slide in policy not included in the manifesto but, even then, it will go to a vote of democratically elected MP's.

I am a big admirer of social media, but it can be as misleading as it is enlightening. I have seen plenty of lies accepted as gospel. Minds led astray by activists engaged in propaganda.

Its worth adding that with Corbyn they have tried being nice. First man up (Benn junior) told him to go and in traditional fashion the messenger was shot. Since then its been downhill all the way and you can understand it if there is a lot of frustration.

I saw someone making a point about Corbyn that the fact that there is a new PM seems to have passed him by altogether. This internal fight is more important, and has always been more important than, you know, his actual job.

However much I want to see a change of leader...The nice Benn Jr as you call him was manoeuvring and stirring.

That is why he got sacked and rightly so.

Labour needs a leader but don't reinvent history..Benn was more than a messenger.

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:The lady doth protests too much..

Duty281 wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:

Duty281 wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:On the political spectrum. And I said pretty far right. Why do you believe it's meaningless? Presumably you consider only some part of Labour vile? You surely find similar true for Tories, UKIP, BNP etc?

Yes, I get that you mean on the political spectrum, but what does 'pretty far-right' mean? Can you define it?

Left and right-wing, to me, are meaningless labels because they indicate a state of static and rigid thought in a world of fluid thought. All people, and parties, have opinions and ideas that are considered 'left-wing' and 'right-wing' simultaneously.

And no, we're rather talking at cross-purposes. There are indeed a gaggle of idiots in every party, who say or do stupid things, but it is not to that which I'm referring when I call Labour vile. The BNP are of course vile, in every sense, but are a nothing party.

I'm sure far brighter people than me have written what they define it as if you need to look it up. You're not left wing at all I would suggest, hence why you describe Labour as vile.

I don't need to look it up, I'm trying to get an understanding of what you mean when you say I'm 'pretty far-right'.

To name a few, I support immigration, the NHS, a multi-ethnic society, the minimum wage, democracy, freedom of speech - are these 'far-right' values?

Meanwhile, at home

This article is for a global audience, and has focused mainly on international policy. But there are some interesting lessons from domestic policy also.
1. “Open v closed” is as important today in politics as “left v right”. Nations do best when they are prepared to be open to the world. This means open in their economies, eschewing protectionism, welcoming foreign investment, running flexible labour markets. It means also open to the benefit of controlled immigration. For all nations this is a hugely contentious area of policy. But I have no doubt London is stronger and more successful through the encouragement of targeted migration.
Isolationism and protectionism now cut across left and right boundaries. They are easy tunes to play but pointless in anything other than the very short-term.
2. The role of the state is changing. The state today needs to be enabling and based on a partnership with the citizen, one of mutual rights and responsibilities. The implications are profound. Public services need to go through the same revolution—professionally, culturally and in organisation—that the private sector has been through.
The old monolithic provision has to be broken down. The user has to be given real power and preference. The system needs proper incentives and rewards. The purpose should be so that public services can adapt and adjust naturally—self-generating reform—rather than being continually prodded and pushed from the centre. Public-sector unions can't be allowed to determine the shape of public services.
In Britain we have put huge investment into our public services. But we are also opening the health service to private and voluntary-sector partnerships, introducing a payment-by-results system, creating competition and allowing hospitals to become self-governing trusts. The new academies and trust schools will have the freedom to develop as independent but non-fee-paying schools, with outside partners like businesses, universities and charities able to sponsor and run them.
3. Welfare systems work only if there is shared responsibility—the state to provide help, the citizens to use that help to help themselves. The pensions reforms Britain is now putting through will, over the decades, give us a system that is affordable and fair between the generations, by ensuring that, though each citizen is guaranteed a basic pension, they will be expected to top that up with their own finances.
4. Law and order matters in a way that is more profound than most commentary suggests. It used to be that progressives were people who wanted an end to prejudice and discrimination and took the view that, in crime, social causes were paramount. Conservatives thought crime was a matter of individual responsibility and that campaigns against discrimination were so much political correctness.
Today the public distinguishes clearly between personal lifestyle issues, where they are liberal, and crime, where they are definitely not. It is what I call the pro-gay-rights, tough-on-crime position. It confounds traditional left/right views.
5. Social exclusion needs special focus. From 1979 to 1997 the incomes of the richest 20% in Britain grew faster (2.5%) than the incomes of the poorest 20% (0.8%). That has been reversed. Since 1997 the incomes of the poorest have risen faster (2.2%) than the richest (2%). However, this masks a tail of under-achievers, the socially excluded. The rising tide does not lift their ships. This issue of social exclusion is common throughout Western nations.

6. Finally, political parties will have to change radically their modus operandi. Contrary to mythology, political parties aren't dying; public interest in politics is as intense as it ever was. As the recent turn-out in the French election shows: give people a real contest and they will come out and vote.
But politics is subject to the same forces of change as everything else. It is less tribal; people will be interested in issues, not necessarily ideologies; political organisation if it is rigid is off-putting; and there are myriad new ways of communicating information. Above all, political parties need to go out and seek public participation, not wait for the public to be permitted the privilege of becoming part of the sect.
So, membership should be looser, policymaking broader and more representative, the internet and interactive communication the norm. Open it all up.

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Odds makers are liking this Smith guy..

Corbyn 1/2
Smith 2/1
Eagle 6/1..

funnyExiledScot wrote:...Alternatively - "Owen Smith - born in Morecambe but not wise".

lostinwales wrote:I saw someone making a point about Corbyn that the fact that there is a new PM seems to have passed him by altogether. This internal fight is more important, and has always been more important than, you know, his actual job.

LondonTiger wrote:

lostinwales wrote:I saw someone making a point about Corbyn that the fact that there is a new PM seems to have passed him by altogether. This internal fight is more important, and has always been more important than, you know, his actual job.

Well, as the Leader of the Opposition he gets paid an extra £73k on top of his MPs salary - so he has some incentive to cling on. Of course if that causes a split and creates a Centre Left Party (Gang o fFour all over again) then what is left in Labour may well be insufficient to be the opposition.

Corbyn was an incompetent constituency MP (I was a constituent for a few years) spending more time swanning off round the world than in the Palace of Westminster or holding constituency surgeries. He has, no surprise, turned out to be incompetent as the leader of his party but the Big Macs want him there so will defend him to the hilt. That they refuse to allow the deputy leader speak to him because "he is a 70 year old man and you may bully him" is a real indictment.