Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

My centrist mates

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    #51
    Originally posted by Lucy Waterman View Post
    Ed Miliband basically invented the modern conception of what being a spad is in the mid 90s, so I can't really believe he became a prisoner of that system.

    I think he can probably own his own faults.
    Oh yeah, I hold no candle for Ed or his useless brother. But Corbyn’s faults as leader are almost as egregious as Ed’s. A shit sandwich of a European policy that I’m fucking sick of. Starmer, McDonnell, Himself- always manage to say some shite that means arse Brexit and fuck knows what international treaty breaking bollocks for the Nordies. It’s fucking May in a few days, and Lab are still Lexiting bastards. By June there needs to be backstop legislation in place that more or less lands the entire UK staying in SM and CU unless the border in the sea is on. I’m almost 17 years here and I’m a wee bit feard I can’t prove residence to the satisfaction of Irish Citizenship rules. And the way the stupid fucks are going over there Labour or Tory there will be tit for tat deportations.

    What the fuck is Labour policy on Brexit, the North and the conditions that will make even milquetoast social democracy possible (no chance under WTO dystopia). But instead Gardiner and pals talking shite.
    Last edited by Lang Spoon; 27-04-2018, 22:23.

    Comment


      #52
      Yeah, agree with all of that. And as for "useless brother" - David M would have been ten times as shit as Ed, and anyone who doesn't realise that - well, they're part of the problem.

      Comment


        #53
        Chris Deerin. Fuckin eejit.

        Comment


          #54
          No wonder Jason Cowley publishes him. What a sensible fuckface bam (Cowley). Stephen Bush is the only reason to click on that NS rag online.
          Last edited by Lang Spoon; 27-04-2018, 22:31.

          Comment


            #55
            David Miliband could have mathematically won that leadership election if he'd promised Ed Balls and Yvette Cooper Big 4 jobs, which he would have ended up giving them anyway if he'd won (Stephen Bush's insight, not mine). That's gross ineptitude almost on the scale of costing your supporters thirteen quid a pop because you don't know when not to leave a meeting, but in that case they still felt Jez was the right person to run the economy.

            Also, David Miliband cannot speak human.

            Comment


              #56
              Ed was hopelessly caught out by Scotland. Even after the referendum, he ought to have seen the Cameron line coming. If Labour was going to be in government, it was going to have 5 times as many MPs as the SNP. I don't think it was impossible to prepare the electorate better. The Tories were in office, and would have had first go in a hung Parliament. Would the English and Welsh electorate have cared that much about Labour looking for some sort of loose arrangement with the SNP after Cameron had failed? Cameron wasn't ruling out being propped up by the DUP, was he?
              Last edited by Tubby Isaacs; 27-04-2018, 22:36.

              Comment


                #57
                Agree. And ruling out a coalition altogether after what seemed like a month of indecision just made him look disingenuous.

                Comment


                  #58
                  Then the shiteawful carcrash debate when he was almost as isolated as Fargle.

                  Comment


                    #59
                    Cameron worked those debates to his advantage incredibly well. I suspect the hand of Osborne in that - someone who did the petty side of politics brillantly, while being phenomenally shit at the actual business of governing.

                    I'm trying to think of a vice versa example. Alistair Darling, maybe.
                    Last edited by Lucy Waterman; 27-04-2018, 22:51.

                    Comment


                      #60
                      Macro genius, detail and policy implementation is for losers.

                      Comment


                        #61
                        Originally posted by Lucy Waterman View Post
                        Cameron worked those debates to his advantage incredibly well. I suspect the hand of Osborne in that - someone who did the petty side of politics brillantly, while being phenomenally shit at the actual business of governing.

                        I'm trying to think of a vice versa example. Alistair Darling, maybe.

                        I meant the green/SNP/PC love in on BBC sans Cameron where Ed and Farage were the punching bags. That one more than the Sky “debate”. But either way, Ed was toast. And yeah, Cameron brazenly boycotting the bbc debate left Ed snookered.
                        Last edited by Lang Spoon; 28-04-2018, 04:16.

                        Comment


                          #62
                          Yeah Wingco's opening post rings very true (and like E10 I tangentially bump up against these people and threads from time to time).

                          It's fascinating how after the shock of last year's election result wore off they created this explanation in which the entire understanding of this shock was down to Labour failing to capitalise on the worst campaign in history - thereby proving that left wing policies are unelectable. This has moved from being a theory to being established fact (there are people on this thread who say the same). There are obviously a ton of things that happened in 2017 and this is possibly one of them. But for the true believers it's now an established - and the only thing that we can take from that election.

                          The thing that really boils my piss about these people (predictably) is their attitude to the occupation. A smarmy supercilious "realpolitik" response to anyone who expresses support for Palestinian human rights. They will all say that they oppose the occupation but ask them what they actually mean by that and it stops at "but, Hamas". I even saw someone on one of Wingco's Facebook threads say basically "non violent resistance to the occupation is fundamentally antisemitic" and then apparently without any sense of self awareness say two posts later "nobody actually conflates opposition to the occupation with antisemitism". I can't see non opposition to the occupation as anything more than the clearest most egregious form of racism there is. But these people would rather just look the other way (or at best live in some utopia in which some magical "peace talks" occur out of nowhere and everybody ends up happy).

                          Sorry but this fucking acceptance of the long and brutal and deeply, violently racist oppression of the Palestinians is the thing that I can't forgive these fuckers for.

                          Comment


                            #63
                            I too have a number of centrist mates, who explain to me the problem of antisemitism in Labour. (even though I'm more Jewish than they are. ) Most of them own nice houses, some more than one. If pushed they would probably say the Iraq war was a mistake, but they hark back to the heady days of Blair, without acknowledging that some of the problems we face now especially around housing and PFI are due to issues not dealt with then. And they still yearn for a king or queen over the water.

                            But I also take heart from other friends one once a young Thatcherite who is now full on pro Corbyn.

                            Comment


                              #64
                              Originally posted by Janik View Post
                              However, one definitive recent trend in politics is for anti-establishment people and movements winning. And those have come from both the left AND the right. What has worked is a galvanising figure promising to tear down the elites, exactly how they intend on tearing it down is less relevant than they say they will. As such, I wonder how much attacks from people associated with Blair/Brown era ministers are harmful.
                              They aren't. See Corbyns comment about getting 18 pages of attacks in the Daily Heil.

                              The problem with centrism is that there has to be a centre ground to move to. In the 80s and 90s you had a comparatively sharply defined Left and Right, and Blair sailed right through the middle. Then from 1997, you had what appeared to be two parties - three if you count 2010 - who pretty much stood for the same things and said the same words. Of course, none of them really meant what they were saying but as long as the soundbites were vague enough and it was a presentable middle-aged man in a suit saying it then that was all you needed. There is no defined centre ground there. I was presented with a choice of John Jackson or Jack Johnson.

                              This leaves the way for Corbyn, Farage, Trump, Sanders... something different. In 20 years time, centrism will come back as people tire of the extremes.
                              Last edited by Snake Plissken; 28-04-2018, 07:55.

                              Comment


                                #65
                                Centrism ain't what it was, though. Centrism was once accepting the Welfare State, postwar consensus, social democracy and now centrism is accepting liberalism, TINA, legitimate concerns, or rather the extremes of forty years ago. In twenty years, sure, there will be centrism, it may even be popular, but the centre of what?

                                Comment


                                  #66
                                  Originally posted by Lucy Waterman View Post
                                  The 2017 result suggested a lot of things. It certainly suggested that Corbynism has a broader appeal than nearly anyone (apparently excluding Karie Murphy) thought possible. But it also suggests that even with the worst Tory campaign imaginable, fourteen and a half million voters were prepared to back them in order to ensure Corbyn did not become Prime Minister. Like the people who backed Owen Smith in the leadership election, it's not unreasonable to believe that these people will never vote for Corbyn. Wingco says his appeal is incontrovertible - sadly for anyone who wants the Tories out anytime soon, it remains unproven.
                                  I don't think the goal is to win over all these Tory voters. As you say, that would be a pointless waste of resources. The question isn't whether they can be persuaded to vote for Corbyn, but whether they can be persuade to bother voting for May.

                                  In 1997 it is worth noting the Tories managed to lose 4.5 million votes, compared to 1992. Labour's vote - compared to 92 - went up by 'just' two million. The other 2.5 million just couldn't be arsed going to vote at all (turnout dropped by 6% - in terms of actual votes cast, almost exactly 2.5 million).

                                  So Labour's mighty landslide was not based on Blair winning over swathes of Conservative support, but on the Tory voters being so sickened of Major and his inept, venal, backstabbing party that they couldn't bring themselves to vote for Major or against Blair. They just stayed at home.

                                  So I think the idea that Labour have to win over disenchanted Tory voters is incorrect. In an ideal world, of course, they would. But if Blair couldn't do it in 1997, then tit's a bit much to expect Corbyn to do it now. And unnecessary. The Tory voters just need to be disenchanted.

                                  Does anyone really think the electorate are going to get MORE enthused with the Conservative Party over the next couple of years?

                                  The only things standing between Corbyn and Downing Street are time (he is getting on a bit) and the relentless attacks from the lunatic wing of his party. When John Woodcock uses the few seconds of the day when he isn't attacking Corbyn to defend Amber Rudd, you have to wonder what the Hell is going on.

                                  Comment


                                    #67
                                    I agree with a fair bit of that. Only it's not enough for Conservative voters to be disenchanted - they also need to be sufficiently non-hostile to Labour not to turn out and vote Conservative purely out of terror at a Corbyn premiership. This may sound a pedantic point, but the distinction could be of critical importance.

                                    There are other grounds for concern I think beyond time and internecine warfare - Labour will be using an untried machine and we still don't know what form the opponent will take. Cautious optimism seems appropriate, not certainty.

                                    Comment


                                      #68
                                      Oh, and whether the egregious Woodcock and a few right-wing pals decide to cut their losses and back boundary reform like Blairite suicide bombers.

                                      Comment


                                        #69
                                        Originally posted by Lucy Waterman View Post
                                        I agree with a fair bit of that. Only it's not enough for Conservative voters to be disenchanted - they also need to be sufficiently non-hostile to Labour not to turn out and vote Conservative purely out of terror at a Corbyn premiership. This may sound a pedantic point, but the distinction could be of critical importance.

                                        There are other grounds for concern I think beyond time and internecine warfare - Labour will be using an untried machine and we still don't know what form the opponent will take. Cautious optimism seems appropriate, not certainty.
                                        I think the "Stop Corbyn" thing was important in 2017. Otherwise the Tories would have done even worserer.

                                        I suspect that next time around that fear will have been blunted - they can't re-run the vitriolic media campaign, it just won't work second time around. there will be a distinct, "Might as well let Old Corbo have a shot, can't be any worse than that useless shower. At least a ruthless centralised dictatorship might get the trains running on time. And he'll make sure there are seats for everyone."

                                        Comment


                                          #70
                                          Originally posted by E10 Rifle View Post
                                          As an occasional collider with some of the threads you're talking about, I understand and feel your pain Wingco. It has caused me to ponder whether the most left-baiting left-hating demographic in modern Britain is middle-aged white male music journalists. Is there something about rock'n'roll that actually encourages a latent conservatism, or disdain for the 'earnestness' of political activism?
                                          i'm going to suggest that all these people fit (to one extent or another) this sort of pattern:

                                          from a lower-middle class background - low enough to play the token prole at university; moved to London in the early 90's; flirted with radical politics, possibly even squatted for a short while; got a decent entry-level professional job; bought a flat in camden or islington for a song; made their peace with blair for ostensibly pragmatic reasons, coincidentally at the same time that neoliberal policies saw the value of their house skyrocket; opposed iraq, but half-heartedly, and hate stop the war coalition more than the people who actually started the war; still view themselves as "a leftie" despite the fact that their small mortgage was paid off years ago and now they have a small fortune in assets and their political involvement is now restricted to maybe door-knocking at election season and getting worked up about student politics on social media.

                                          there's an extent to which these people's opposition corbyn is entirely in line with their class-interests. were they accountants or lawyers, we probably wouldn't bat an eyelid.

                                          for the white middle-aged music journalists, i think, there's more to it than that; corbynism is threatening to them personally because the way that it mobilises young people reminds them of their own hip idealistic twenty-something selves that they are still trying to kid themselves they haven't sold out. corbynism's success (or potential success) is a constant reminder that the compromises they made were not forced upon them, but made willingly. initially they clung to the "he's unelectable, corbynites are naive" lines that validated their own political journeys. now that's pivoted to a concern-troll position of "i can't support corbyn because i'm deeply principled and corbyn did brexit/hates jews/doesn't uncritically swallow mi6 propaganda" - a position that might hold up to some scrutiny had they applied those same principles to the actual war criminal they can't bring themselves to fully renounce.

                                          the left in general is almost certainly better placed getting working class people to stand up for their own class interests rather than pandering to or worrying about the tantrums and self-delusions of the solidly bourgeois.
                                          Last edited by Bizarre Löw Triangle; 29-04-2018, 09:03.

                                          Comment


                                            #71
                                            Is this an NME v Melody Maker split? I fully recognize Collins & Maconie being sell-out "sensible concerns about immigration" centrists but Price, Kulkarni, Parkes obviously remain true leftists unless I am missing something.

                                            If it is an NME v Melody Maker split, it goes back to Collins & Maconie taking NME from a radical paper in the mid-80s to an ironic Brit Pop flag-waver in the 90s ripe for a Blairist sell-out, whilst Melody Maker attempted to keep cultural standards afloat, despite some dodgy Record of the Week choices (see discussion in Chart Music podcast on 1995).
                                            Last edited by Satchmo Distel; 29-04-2018, 08:37.

                                            Comment


                                              #72
                                              I broadly fit into that demographic described by BLT above (apart from the music hack bit), and although I’m no aligned activist these days I rhaven’t done the rightward theoretical drift at all.

                                              As for the centrist dads, I often wonder why they cling to Labour - the Social Democrat wing of the Liberals seems a much better fit for both their ideologies and self interests. But then similar applies to both the Liberal libertarians and one nation “left” Tory types - they really should swap party allegiances.

                                              Comment


                                                #73
                                                it's interesting that Taylor Parkes who has been most publicly anti-Corbyn has a life which when he was still on here seemed very far away from the one BLT outlines.

                                                Comment


                                                  #74
                                                  Yes Satchmo, I don't think it's an NME/MM thing. Wingco and Spearmint Rhino are still very much of the left but there's a whole group of others who I see on their FB pages who I imagine are mostly MM who are not

                                                  Comment


                                                    #75
                                                    Originally posted by Lurgee View Post
                                                    they can't re-run the vitriolic media campaign, it just won't work second time around.
                                                    Eh? They are doing precisely that. What is the anti-semetism stuff all about apart from a vitriolic media campaign intended to smear him and by association the project? Or the implication that Corbyn is a Russian agent? See the front page of today's Sunday Times for the latest laughably desperate example of that trope. They are having to find new angles like those for the vitriol because the standard attack, used successfully on Milliband and unsuccessfully in the US on Obama, that he's a socialist will be greeted with a shrug and a response of 'Yes, and proud. What of it?'.

                                                    Whether it can work or not, and whether your, erm, interesting assertation on the last page that Corbyn can only be beaten through the faults of others rather than his own personality and politics, is very much to be confirmed.
                                                    Last edited by Janik; 29-04-2018, 10:14.

                                                    Comment

                                                    Working...
                                                    X