news & politics:discussion

[st dan]

In footballing terms, I like to compare the Corbyn/Starmer handover to that of Hodgson and Southgate with the England national team. 

Hodgson had all the experience in the world, and done the hard yards of his career out of the limelight until finally being given the shot at the big job. He was very likeable, and relatable to the person on the street, and had a cult following. There was a real will to succeed with a genuine nice man in charge, with his heart in the right place. However, the 2014 World Cup showed that despite all the hope, he was not the right man to lead us to glory for multiple reasons. 
The baton was then handed to a more pragmatic and middle of the road manager in Southgate. He was much younger and more ‘football smart’ than he predecessor. He was very much a Mr Sensible, and despite the seeming lack of ‘spark’ from him, his England side improved greatly, and came very close to winning the next World Cup in 2018. He wasn’t instantly likeable or necessarily the best choice at the time, but once people realised that there was a genuine chance of England winning something, hope and expectation grew for him. Who knows what the future holds with him, but there is a chance he is the right man for the job. 

[Ayrshire Chris]

13 minutes ago, Haan said:

I think there are a few things that might help like reversing the whole "gov can choose the head of the BBC" thing that Cameron introduced, setting up grants and schemes to get more working class journalists and editors in higher positions, maybe having more worker ownership models in some papers or outlets. And maybe killing Murdoch

 

There’s been several attempts up here to run a worker owned daily paper but the problem has always been their ability to attract readership away from the popular tabloids. These papers are not too keen on working class journalists. Maybe the way ahead for balance isn’t the printed media but lies in on line subscription funded content. Circulation in all newspapers is falling especially amongst the younger population. 

[mattiloy]

My view is that the Blairites are missing a key point that is that Corbyn, Brexit, Trump, BLM etc are all part of the next phase of democracy.

Iraq and the financial crisis set the ball in motion - it showed that those who represented us in government did not act in the people’s interest. Throw in cash for honours, expenses scandals, etc etc

In the wake of that, representative democracy is not enough anymore, people want to feel powerful, not to feel ’heard’ but to feel involved, in control - participatory democracy.

The people don’t therefore want to simply appoint people who went to Oxbridge to be the moral arbiters of the public realm anymore. Starmer’s swift neutering of the internal democracy of the labour party shows that he does not understand that.

Edited February 17, 2021 by mattiloy

[squirrelarmy]

This whole Corbyn/Starmer argument is daft. 
 

“We can’t vote for Starmer because he’s not Corbyn and he’s too Tory”

Then because you don’t vote for him/Labour you leave the actual Tories in charge. 🤦‍♂️ 

[Guest]

4 minutes ago, squirrelarmy said:

This whole Corbyn/Starmer argument is daft. 
 

“We can’t vote for Starmer because he’s not Corbyn and he’s too Tory”

Then because you don’t vote for him/Labour you leave the actual Tories in charge. 🤦‍♂️ 

Our Parliamentary system also doesn’t really allow people to vote for anyone else as a vote for any other party is pretty much letting the Tories in. 

[mattiloy]

3 minutes ago, Ozanne said:

Our Parliamentary system also doesn’t really allow people to vote for anyone else as a vote for any other party is pretty much letting the Tories in. 

Yeah inspiring, they should write that on the side of their buses in 2024 ’vote labour, because what other choice do you have?’

Also what are you on about? On the whole its the system which most allows you to protest vote. Normally only in about 1/3rd of seats does your vote really matter.

In the seat where I cast my vote, Labour has a comfortable majority even in 2019. I can and will vote green with a clear conscience.

Moreover, you vote for your MP, so of I was in a marginal, provided my Labour candidate was progressive enough I’d still vote for them. They’d probs have a higher chance of getting in than the green and would vote along similar lines. However, never in a million years would I vote labour if my candidate was a Blairite.

[Haan]

1 minute ago, mattiloy said:

Yeah inspiring, they should write that on the side of their buses in 2024 ’vote labour, because what other choice do you have?’

Also what are you on about? On the whole its the system which most allows you to protest vote. Normally only in about 1/3rd of seats does your vote really matter.

In the seat where I cast my vote, Labour has a comfortable majority even in 2019. I can and will vote green with a clear conscience.

Moreover, you vote for your MP, so of I was in a marginal, provided my Labour candidate was progressive enough I’d still vote for them. They’d probs have a higher chance of getting in than the green and would vote along similar lines. However, never in a million years would I vote labour if my candidate was a Blairite.

I'd also add criticising Starmer does not mean you're not going to vote Labour or anything, and I think a lot of people dismiss fair and honest criticism of him as automatically voting the Tories in lol

[Haan]

24 minutes ago, Ayrshire Chris said:

There’s been several attempts up here to run a worker owned daily paper but the problem has always been their ability to attract readership away from the popular tabloids. These papers are not too keen on working class journalists. Maybe the way ahead for balance isn’t the printed media but lies in on line subscription funded content. Circulation in all newspapers is falling especially amongst the younger population. 

I think there are some cool new media outlets I like like Double Down News and Novara Media, and I haven't looked into worker owned media much but I was thinking of something more radical like forcing one of the big ones to go worker owned. I have no idea how it work though, just a random suggestion haha 

 

[eFestivals]

22 minutes ago, mattiloy said:

My view is that the Blairites are missing a key point that is that Corbyn, Brexit, Trump, BLM etc are all part of the next phase of democracy.

You might be right, but I might be right in thinking emotion based politics would not be an improvement.

 

22 minutes ago, mattiloy said:

Iraq and the financial crisis set the ball in motion - it showed that those who represented us in government did not act in the people’s interest. Throw in cash for honours, expenses scandals, etc etc

In the wake of that, representative democracy is not enough anymore, people want to feel powerful, not to feel ’heard’ but to feel involved, in control - participatory democracy.

The people don’t therefore want to simply appoint people who went to Oxbridge to be the moral arbiters of the public realm anymore. Starmer’s swift neutering of the internal democracy of the labour party shows that he does not understand that.

Yeah, the new socialist politics has to be about what you want, because only you can be right, and the electorate is magically going to align itself with you, rather than you align with others.

And the left wonders what it's problems are. 😛

[Losing my hair]

1 hour ago, hfuhruhurr said:

If you want to be a protest group, fine, go ahead with whatever rocks your boat.

But, if you want to be in power to effect change, then you need to win an election.

Labour go in a lovely oscillation (beautifully illustrated in the play "Labour of Love") where:
1) They are in power
2) They go too far left
3) They lose power
4) They go further left and are determined that's why they lost, believing that socialism is the way forward
5) They argue with themselves until they realise the public isn't socialist (duh)
6) They go right
7) They get back into power
See (1)

It's happened so often and all it does it put Tories in power for more time than Labour. And you don't get to steer the ship from the opposition benches. The poorer get poorer, but at least Labour are faithful to their principles. What a load of bollocks.

Ugh, I despair. I want Labour in power, and for that they need to be electable by the public, not by several hundred thousand enthusiasts.

You've missed out several "arguing amongst themselves" stages - there should be 7 not 1.

[zahidf]

 

[Simsy]

4 hours ago, hfuhruhurr said:

Ugh, I despair. I want Labour in power, and for that they need to be electable by the public, not by several hundred thousand enthusiasts.

Yeah, I don't get the people who think Labour should never pander to the general public and "sell out". If they're not electable then we're stuck with the fucking Tories. Or are they expecting Corbyn to lead a violent revolution, overthrow our democratically elected government and rule over a country that voted against him?

[Guest]

 

The impacts of Brexit need to get more time on the news than it's getting currently. 

[eFestivals]

30 minutes ago, Ozanne said:

 

The impacts of Brexit need to get more time on the news than it's getting currently. 

All of the impacts of brexit are the EU's fault.

After all, they wouldn't tear up everything they've agreed between themselves over the last 70 years to do what the UK says. 

[Guest]

Tomorrow at 11am Labour are doing a press conference outlying their plan for the UK if anyones interested.

[efcfanwirral]

4 hours ago, Simsy said:

Yeah, I don't get the people who think Labour should never pander to the general public and "sell out". If they're not electable then we're stuck with the fucking Tories. Or are they expecting Corbyn to lead a violent revolution, overthrow our democratically elected government and rule over a country that voted against him?

It's all i can think of- it's the only way their way of thinking ever will run this country.

Edited February 17, 2021 by efcfanwirral

[steviewevie]

Starmer wants to be Attlee to Johnson's Churchill.

 

[steviewevie]

 

[mattiloy]

What happens if he comes out with a radical set of policies? Do we all come back on here and change sides? You lot all say it’s looney left stuff and I declare myself a Starmerite?

[eFestivals]

8 hours ago, mattiloy said:

What happens if he comes out with a radical set of policies? Do we all come back on here and change sides? You lot all say it’s looney left stuff and I declare myself a Starmerite?

there's radical, and then there's beyond the public's acceptence.

And there's competent leadership from an individual whose values are largely similar to the electorate's. Even the most vocal of Corbynites rarely mention Palestine.

[Guest]

9 hours ago, steviewevie said:

Starmer wants to be Attlee to Johnson's Churchill.

 

‘10 years of Conservative government made Britain ill-prepared for the pandemic’. That is exactly what I want to hear.

[steviewevie]

Look at that chin!

 

[Guest]

26 minutes ago, steviewevie said:

Look at that chin!

 

What a beautiful man. 

[mattiloy]

2 hours ago, eFestivals said:

there's radical, and then there's beyond the public's acceptence.

And there's competent leadership from an individual whose values are largely similar to the electorate's. Even the most vocal of Corbynites rarely mention Palestine.

Do you have specific Corbyn era policies in mind which would be beyond the publics acceptance?

[eFestivals]

19 minutes ago, mattiloy said:

Do you have specific Corbyn era policies in mind which would be beyond the publics acceptance?

promising the world on a stick while saying only a small number would have to pay extra taxes.

You can take loads of different angles on that for why the public rejected it.