Jezza Corbyn

John Hawkins wrote:

I don't see peace coming anytime soon, with a left or right government. I have always understood human culture and happenings to be part of the weather systems. War is coming our way in Europe, like it has done time and time again.
I laugh at Nige and his cronies really thinking they can halt immigration. America couldn't have tried harder to stop the Mexican thing and looked what happened there. People have always migrated "economically" and nothing will stop it, it's like flocks of birds and trade winds. Us Cornish soon scarpered off to South America when we didn't like the poverty and pestilence the squires had created here.
The only answer is a level playing field.

And England.

Trouble is how much of your green and pleasant land will we have to build on to accomadate everybody that wants to live here? Add half of eastern Europe, about 50 million from Asia and the same from Africa? Have to recruit lots more nurses so we would have to import everybody fom the Phillipines just for that, as Argule fans I would have thought you'd grasped the rudiments of capacity.

Les Miserable wrote:

John Hawkins wrote:

I don't see peace coming anytime soon, with a left or right government. I have always understood human culture and happenings to be part of the weather systems. War is coming our way in Europe, like it has done time and time again.
I laugh at Nige and his cronies really thinking they can halt immigration. America couldn't have tried harder to stop the Mexican thing and looked what happened there. People have always migrated "economically" and nothing will stop it, it's like flocks of birds and trade winds. Us Cornish soon scarpered off to South America when we didn't like the poverty and pestilence the squires had created here.
The only answer is a level playing field.

And England.

And, of course, quite a few Englanders making their way down west in return, after they built a bridge to get down and back out quick after a weekend of rain and unfulfilled dreams.
It's always gone on. It's just a question of if the movement of people and ideas is sustainable, and how quick is the change. And of course, income comparability.

There's good and bad migration, and it involves not just people, but capital, ideas, culture and working practices. A perfect example of "bad migration" was the Samworths from oop North buying the Gingsters pasty thing. In the 1970s, the Ginsters pasty was a treat owned by a local farmer, and could hold it's own with many other local brands, and then the mass production pie brigade came down in their landing craft, waving big pounds, bad ideas, and changed everything, resulting in crap jobs and the horrible tosh that Ginsters now sell across the whole country. That is bad migration.
As to green and pleasant lands, Iggy, fear not, the "fill yer boots" brigade are busy building " salarymen pods " all over the country under the euphemism of student accommodation. I see the latest block of "student accomodation" in Regent St is shortly available at £120 a week !! Dear oh dear oh dear    That's more money than any average hotelier could makenet in a week, with no sheets to wash, breakfast to supply etc., and is nearly £30 a week higher than the Local Housing allowance for a single person. Who'd have thought it ? ... "students" paying 10 grand a year to start for fees can still afford accommodation the poor can't. No wonder Brent has cottoned on.
Tax breaks, miserly spec, no tenancy rights, and cheap to build. One day lower paid families will also suddenly have to live in these pods under the cosh, rather than the reasonable spec post war council housing with gardens. And those aspiring working class in Woodford will cheer at the poor bashing. Nothing like community.

Everything I think about the Labour leadership and broader politics in the UK is neatly summed up here by the ever-reliable Will Self: [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

For all those reasons, I'll be voting for Mr Corbyn

Will Self the confessed user of the deadly heroin? How can a heavy drug user speak more sense than all the straights? Answers on a postcard please.
Penned some good books too.

Iggy wrote:

Will Self the confessed user of the deadly heroin? How can a heavy drug user speak more sense than all the straights? Answers on a postcard please.
Penned some good books too.

Most of the influential writers of the last century were heavy drug users.

Hugh Watt wrote:

Iggy wrote:

Will Self the confessed user of the deadly heroin? How can a heavy drug user speak more sense than all the straights? Answers on a postcard please.
Penned some good books too.

Most of the influential writers of the last century were heavy drug users.

Even more so when it comes to songwriters.

No shit shylocks.

You'll be telling me next that Huxley was a user.

Iggy wrote:

You'll be telling me next that Huxley was a user.

Huxley Pig was on drugs, what next, Peppa on the game?

Just imagine if Jezza did win, a Labour Party which told the truth about what they planned to do that never got elected again, the Tories forever.

Would be ironic if Corbyn was elected by Tory supporters, then won the subsequent General Election and implemented his policies.

[quote="Lord Tisdale"]

Iggy wrote:

You'll be telling me next that Huxley was a user.

Huxley Pig was on drugs, what next, Peppa on the game?

Just imagine if Jezza did win, a Labour Party which told the truth about what they planned to do that never got elected again, the Tories forever.

And this is what is wrong with politics today it's all about winning, where have the political ideals gone? It seems that the only way the Labs can get back into power is to turn into the Tories, we tried that under Blair, I for one didn't like it.
Anyway what's wrong with being a decent opposition party? It's too easy for the gov to steamroll crap policy through the machine. Personally I would turn the houses of parliament into social housing, ban political parties and have a more people based election process.

Corbyn set to apologise for the Iraq war if he becomes leader.

That'd be quite a big thing.

In your face Blair.

Lord Tisdale wrote:

Iggy wrote:

You'll be telling me next that Huxley was a user.

Huxley Pig was on drugs, what next, Peppa on the game?

Just imagine if Jezza did win, a Labour Party which told the truth about what they planned to do that never got elected again, the Tories forever.

Weren't you telling everyone how Nigel farage was the young buck sticking it to the man before the election? How did that work out then?

Weren't labour voters all idiots too for voting for Tony Blair? Now when they look like showing signs of a backbone it's all futile because they'll never get elected.

Worse than Webb you are

Hugh Watt wrote:

Lord Tisdale wrote:

Iggy wrote:

You'll be telling me next that Huxley was a user.

Huxley Pig was on drugs, what next, Peppa on the game?

Just imagine if Jezza did win, a Labour Party which told the truth about what they planned to do that never got elected again, the Tories forever.

Weren't you telling everyone how Nigel farage was the young buck sticking it to the man before the election? How did that work out then?

Weren't labour voters all idiots too for voting for Tony Blair? Now when they look like showing signs of a backbone it's all futile because they'll never get elected.

Worse than Webb you are

God but you're a tosser.

Farage and Corbyn have a lot in common, they speak their mind which is refreshing, neither will ever be PM and their parties are full of muppets.

Labour voters are morons to a greater extent as they claimed to be socialists yet voted for Blair, at least the Tory voters are honest.

"Labour voters are morons to a greater extent as they claimed to be socialists yet voted for Blair, at least the Tory voters are honest."

I have some sympathy with that sentiment.

What do you do when your party leaves you as New Labour left much of its membership? It's kind of similar to the feeling many of us have about Brent's Argyle. It's still my Argyle the way I want it to be no matter how hard he makes it for me and that's the way it is going to stay. I ain't going anywhere and I'll be here long after he's buggered off. I'll put up with much of the crap for the time being.

The problem here for Labour is that when Blair removed Clause 4 from the Labour Party constitution he also pretty much ripped out the heart of what the Labour Party was supposed to be and replaced it with a nothingness.

To then it was, basically, a bog standard relatively moderate socialist party in direct opposition to the traditional Tory free market capitalist thinking since then it's far less clear exactly what it is supposed to be or even what it is for. Clause 4 was what defined it as socialist and it's removal defined it as something else. But what?

If pressed I suspect that senior figures in the Labour party even now might be willing to use "social" as in "social democracy" but would shudder to reverse the wording. "Democratic socialist" anybody? No. You just don't hear it but they can't be Social Democrats because of the now defunct SDP...

Following on from that if the Labour Party is in no way socialist then it can only be a free market capitalist party which makes it a watered down version of the Tories. If the Tories are seen to be evil then the Labour party is at least halfway to being evil. "Vote for us! - we're only half as bad as them!" isn't ever going to resonate.

So that is the deep philosophical dilemma that currently defines Labour. It's nearly always, rather laughably really, decried as being "socialist" (often venomously spitted through gritted teeth) despite being nothing of the sort but it isn't anything else at all in particular.

Roll on to the current leadership election. There's a stark choice to be made. Go back to the Clause 4ness or carry on as they are slowly drfting to the right and gradually eroding the ties to the wider Labour/Trade Union movement as they run ever further from socialism.

If you are a Clause 4 bod then Corbyn is yer man. If not then you have Kendall to accelarate the drift to the right or the other two to muddle along in the undefined nothingness that conversely defines them.

What of the other two? They both have been in cabinet both in government and in opposistion and have accepted cabinet responsibility along the way. This means they haveboth been loyal to the party and to the current leader at the time but also that they both have a muddled voting record. What do they believe? What do they actually stand for? Doesn't their voting histories belay an inherent careerist hypocrisy? They'll vote any which way whenever on anything in the name of loyalty. Loyalty is normally a positive virtue but in this case it is a weakness for them both.

And then there is Corbyn. He's portayed as a principled man with genuine, vaguely Old Labour (= pre-Clause 4) beliefs who not only talks the talk but walks the walk and as a backbencher he has a long record of rebellion against the party whip. Were he to become leader any demands he made for loyalty would be rubbished and he would then be labelled a hypocrite.

The only candidate the hypocrisy label fails to firmly adhere to is Kendall but that is only because she's not been in parliament long enough to rack up a dodgy voting history but her every utterance suggests that she shouldn't even be in the Labour party at all so her very presence here defines her as a hypocrite!

Then there is the massive upsurge in membership caused by the election. A good thing, surely? Except they are expected to support "Labour values" (whatever they are) and some have been rejected. Do they want new members or not? A complete mess.

It seems to me that Corbyn is the one with the momentum. I see him addressing huge rallies in big places and I see the others meeting a few people in a room. The difference could not be more stark. So does the party hierarchy get behind him and pour some petrol on his bonfire? No, of course not. Gordon Brown opts for Cooper, Prescott for Burnham and Blair and Ed Milliband keep their counsel knowing that they'd be the kiss of death to whoever they opted for and practically everyone, bar the hundreds, maybe thousands, who are turning up for Corbyn is anti-Corbyn which reinforces the  "Vote for us! - we're only half as bad as them!" idea. As George Galloway put it they are differing cheeks of the same arse; as the SNP would have it they are all Red Tories.

It's a fiasco of huge proportion and it won't be long before the question is asked "how can they form a government when they can't even run their own leadership election sensibly?" and there's no answer to it that'll be any use.

The only way out for the Labour Party is for the eventual winner to win by an over-whelming majority and the only candidate that is likely to happen to Corbyn - who rather ironically is labelled as "unelectable" by opponents who are likely to be proven by events to be unelectable themselves.

Unless Corbyn can win and overcome what will be an intensely hostile press and engender some populist hope that flourishes in this country similar to the way Syriza has in Greece or Podemos has in Spain then the only winner in the Labour leadership election will be the Tories.

"It's kind of similar to the feeling many of us have about Brent's Argyle. It's still my Argyle the way I want it to be no matter how hard he makes it for me and that's the way it is going to stay. I ain't going anywhere and I'll be here long after he's buggered off. I'll put up with much of the crap for the time being."

Comparing a truly lifelong labour of love - (your football team) with a political party and their varying politicking leaders/policies, is stretching it a bit.

I can understand loving Argyle. An equivalent doesn't exist in politics. If it does, those concerned need to have a proper word with themselves.

I was just trying to imagine why "socialists voted for Blair" as Lord Tis put it.

It can't have been because they liked him or agreed with him, could it?, yet they (or at least lots of them) obviously did.

Maybe he was just seen as the lesser of two evils.

Maybe that is all Labour can ever be.

It's the fear that makes them vote Franny, fear of socialism steers many people towards the Tories, fear of starvation may hopefully steer some people away from them, but with everybody (except a very few exceptions) not seeming to give a shite whether the health service as we know it, the welfare state and education exist for the coming generations I would argue that the majority of the voting public are the morons, left, right, whatever, couldnt give a shite selfish wankers, unfortunately the rest of us have also inherited the government the morons voted for.
I don't think that politics have ever been so hopeless in Britain, now the SNP have taken the labour heartland away from them the Tories have all the landowners and pretty well anybody earning above ten pound an hour in their pockets I think the future is Tory as far as I can see, I'm going to buy a boat, a big fecker, make loads of money importing illegals then retire in the sun somewhere, Camoron will probably give me a medal.

"Fear of socialism" and hatred of trade unions seems to go hand-in-hand yet without a combination of the two (minus the fear and hatred bit) there'd be no social housing, no free education, no NHS, no weekends off, no paid holiday, no sick pay, no H&S@W, no employment rights, no state pension and no social security safety net of any sort and the various equality and prohibition of discrimination laws would never have been passed.

Those same people usually decry the right to strike, too, but they either forget (unlikely) or are ignorant of (far more likely) exactly why such things are so important. I suppose phossy jaw was a good thing. Moaning minnies. Don't know how lucky they were to have a job.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

And if you don't know what phossy jaw was: [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

I won't link to pictures of the symptoms - they are just too horrific.

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

Blair and Ed Milliband keep their counsel knowing that they'd be the kiss of death to whoever they opted for

Well Blair most certainly but I don't thing Ed is looked on with any real malice.

What a pair of surrender monkeys you two are. Not you exeter man, Frank and Iggy. Do you believe the corporate press mood music that much ?
The Tories were un electable for 15 years, so it's not just a Labour problem.
As for the ludicrous "at least Tories are honest", do me a favour. There are just as many regular Tory voters that have on occasion, when the wind suits, that have voted Labour, as the other way round.
They're called floating voters if the concept is too difficult for you two to comprehend.
Shall pop in on Friday to cheer on Jezza. I wouldn't vote for him probably, as his views aren't green enough for my sensitivities, but I wish him well, and I believe he is yet another symptom of realism all over Europe, as the continent continues to polarise left and right, authoritarian and liberal. Everyone has now seen that an unfettered free market can only end up in complete catastrophe.
"Nationalised" industries are still doing a great job in the shape of the NHS and BBC to name but two.. Nationalised railways would be hugely popular.

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

"Fear of socialism" and hatred of trade unions seems to go hand-in-hand yet without a combination of the two (minus the fear and hatred bit) there'd be no social housing, no free education, no NHS, no weekends off, no paid holiday, no sick pay, no H&S@W, no employment rights, no state pension and no social security safety net of any sort and the various equality and prohibition of discrimination laws would never have been passed.

Those same people usually decry the right to strike, too, but they either forget (unlikely) or are ignorant of (far more likely) exactly why such things are so important. I suppose phossy jaw was a good thing. Moaning minnies. Don't know how lucky they were to have a job.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

And if you don't know what phossy jaw was: [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

I won't link to pictures of the symptoms - they are just too horrific.

Seen far worse down Union St.