neilm
Non-Aligned
Posts: 25,023
|
Post by neilm on Feb 21, 2020 10:42:01 GMT
Only in the same (absurd) way that America created Al Qaeda. And HIV.
|
|
|
Post by Arthur Figgis on Feb 21, 2020 11:08:40 GMT
Only in the same (absurd) way that America created Al Qaeda. And HIV. And Dairylea Triangles.
|
|
CatholicLeft
Labour
2032 posts until I was "accidentally" deleted.
Posts: 6,335
Member is Online
|
Post by CatholicLeft on Feb 21, 2020 14:01:04 GMT
Which, at least, is rooted in truth.
|
|
|
Post by Arthur Figgis on Feb 21, 2020 14:08:57 GMT
Which, at least, is rooted in truth. Unlike Bish’s ramblings.
|
|
Merseymike
Independent
Posts: 39,294
Member is Online
|
Post by Merseymike on Feb 21, 2020 22:27:11 GMT
The witch-hunters continue and noone is prepared to stand up to them. Labour deserve to fail
|
|
|
Post by casualobserver on Feb 21, 2020 23:33:08 GMT
The witch-hunters continue and noone is prepared to stand up to them. Labour deserve to fail There are elements within the Labour Party which recognise that, in a representative democracy, Councillors and candidates must not stray too far from our democratic norms. The Labour Party has a proud self-image of being anti-racist, and it's hardly surprising that the Party is obliged to deal harshly with the anti-semitic racists in its midst, quite a few of whom are effectively entryists. I'm sorry, Merseymike, but it's this idea again that political parties are there to persuade the electorate to lend their elected representatives power so that those elected can change things, rather than that they are there to change the minds of the electorate so that the electorate are ideologically compliant with some elements of the Party.
|
|
Merseymike
Independent
Posts: 39,294
Member is Online
|
Post by Merseymike on Feb 21, 2020 23:49:59 GMT
The witch-hunters continue and noone is prepared to stand up to them. Labour deserve to fail There are elements within the Labour Party which recognise that, in a representative democracy, Councillors and candidates must not stray too far from our democratic norms. The Labour Party has a proud self-image of being anti-racist, and it's hardly surprising that the Party is obliged to deal harshly with the anti-semitic racists in its midst, quite a few of whom are effectively entryists. I'm sorry, Merseymike, but it's this idea again that political parties are there to persuade the electorate to lend their elected representatives power so that those elected can change things, rather than that they are there to change the minds of the electorate so that the electorate are ideologically compliant with some elements of the Party. Waste of time trying to achieve any change without changing hearts and minds. The electorate is miles away from Socialism so, if Labour decides it's more important to be in power I simply don't see what their purpose is. But then I've never seen the point in power for its own sake
|
|
|
Post by casualobserver on Feb 22, 2020 1:25:50 GMT
There are elements within the Labour Party which recognise that, in a representative democracy, Councillors and candidates must not stray too far from our democratic norms. The Labour Party has a proud self-image of being anti-racist, and it's hardly surprising that the Party is obliged to deal harshly with the anti-semitic racists in its midst, quite a few of whom are effectively entryists. I'm sorry, Merseymike, but it's this idea again that political parties are there to persuade the electorate to lend their elected representatives power so that those elected can change things, rather than that they are there to change the minds of the electorate so that the electorate are ideologically compliant with some elements of the Party. Waste of time trying to achieve any change without changing hearts and minds. The electorate is miles away from Socialism so, if Labour decides it's more important to be in power I simply don't see what their purpose is. But then I've never seen the point in power for its own sake We live in an imperfect world. Having the power to nudge that world into a slightly less imperfect state may not appeal to a Utopian, but is the best that most of us can reasonably aspire to.
|
|
|
Post by yellowperil on Feb 22, 2020 7:18:44 GMT
Waste of time trying to achieve any change without changing hearts and minds. The electorate is miles away from Socialism so, if Labour decides it's more important to be in power I simply don't see what their purpose is. But then I've never seen the point in power for its own sake We live in an imperfect world. Having the power to nudge that world into a slightly less imperfect state may not appeal to a Utopian, but is the best that most of us can reasonably aspire to. or of course for a Tory, nudging it towards a slightly more imperfect state.....
|
|
Merseymike
Independent
Posts: 39,294
Member is Online
|
Post by Merseymike on Feb 22, 2020 8:57:11 GMT
Waste of time trying to achieve any change without changing hearts and minds. The electorate is miles away from Socialism so, if Labour decides it's more important to be in power I simply don't see what their purpose is. But then I've never seen the point in power for its own sake We live in an imperfect world. Having the power to nudge that world into a slightly less imperfect state may not appeal to a Utopian, but is the best that most of us can reasonably aspire to. Evidence suggests it's not the case. On balance I think the Blair government was negative not positive. If we have given up on trying to change opinions, let the Tories get on with running the current system
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 22, 2020 9:54:04 GMT
We live in an imperfect world. Having the power to nudge that world into a slightly less imperfect state may not appeal to a Utopian, but is the best that most of us can reasonably aspire to. Evidence suggests it's not the case. On balance I think the Blair government was negative not positive. If we have given up on trying to change opinions, let the Tories get on with running the current system tbh, sulking never comes across well in a child, never mind a grown up.
|
|
Merseymike
Independent
Posts: 39,294
Member is Online
|
Post by Merseymike on Feb 22, 2020 10:16:51 GMT
Evidence suggests it's not the case. On balance I think the Blair government was negative not positive. If we have given up on trying to change opinions, let the Tories get on with running the current system tbh, sulking never comes across well in a child, never mind a grown up. Sigh...you really don't get it. I think the fact that someone like you feels they want to join the Labour party is it's problem. Either we believe in the current system and want to tweak it or we think more profound change is required. If Labour opt for the former there's no logical reason for me to bother with it. I do think that the Tories are best equipped to run a system they wholeheartedly support.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 22, 2020 10:22:41 GMT
tbh, sulking never comes across well in a child, never mind a grown up. Sigh...you really don't get it. I think the fact that someone like you feels they want to join the Labour party is it's problem. Either we believe in the current system and want to tweak it or we think more profound change is required. If Labour opt for the former there's no logical reason for me to bother with it. I do think that the Tories are best equipped to run a system they wholeheartedly support. Clearly I don't - but if your rationale is that I want it 'my way' or not at all then that's probably just as well. As I say, not a good look.
|
|
The Bishop
Labour
Down With Factionalism!
Posts: 36,830
|
Post by The Bishop on Feb 22, 2020 10:43:47 GMT
It is possible to think that on balance Blair didn't change things as much as he could or should have done, and also that trying to win elections is still worthwhile
|
|
|
Post by matureleft on Feb 22, 2020 11:08:36 GMT
There appears to be an acceleration and deepening of the suspension, and in some cases removal, of those who have failed to distinguish in their language between support for the Palestinian cause and anti-semitism. Since the left has substantial direction over the processes involved, from what one can tell, one can suggest some reasons: 1. The EHRC investigation. This must be quite advanced by now. 2. A recognition that Long Bailey (as the candidate most identified with both the elected and appointed leadership of the party) isn't helped by this and a desire to throw the most objectionable culprits under the bus to help her. She has distanced herself pretty clearly from this unpleasant legacy and actually did that, quietly, in the midst of the controversy. 3. Perhaps some recognition that tolerance of these opinions was doing the party electoral harm beyond the Jewish community. 4. Maybe, among some, a recognition that permitting this kind of behaviour and abuse was simply wrong.
|
|
Merseymike
Independent
Posts: 39,294
Member is Online
|
Post by Merseymike on Feb 22, 2020 11:21:09 GMT
Sigh...you really don't get it. I think the fact that someone like you feels they want to join the Labour party is it's problem. Either we believe in the current system and want to tweak it or we think more profound change is required. If Labour opt for the former there's no logical reason for me to bother with it. I do think that the Tories are best equipped to run a system they wholeheartedly support. Clearly I don't - but if your rationale is that I want it 'my way' or not at all then that's probably just as well. As I say, not a good look. I really don't think what things look like are what should matter. You haven't been here long but I've thought for a long time that broad church catch all parties don't work. So the current party system doesn't appeal to me anyway. If Labour decides to revert to centrism, then no reason for me to bother with it. In the future I hope for a time where we can have an electoral system which allows people the opportunity to vote for parties they believe in,not just because they are marginally preferable to the other lot. A choice between centrist Labour and the Tories is no choice at all.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 22, 2020 11:40:02 GMT
Clearly I don't - but if your rationale is that I want it 'my way' or not at all then that's probably just as well. As I say, not a good look. I really don't think what things look like are what should matter. You haven't been here long but I've thought for a long time that broad church catch all parties don't work. So the current party system doesn't appeal to me anyway. If Labour decides to revert to centrism, then no reason for me to bother with it. In the future I hope for a time where we can have an electoral system which allows people the opportunity to vote for parties they believe in,not just because they are marginally preferable to the other lot. A choice between centrist Labour and the Tories is no choice at all. OK, we can agree on the need for electoral reform & something like the Portuguese spread of parties ?
|
|
Merseymike
Independent
Posts: 39,294
Member is Online
|
Post by Merseymike on Feb 22, 2020 13:06:07 GMT
I really don't think what things look like are what should matter. You haven't been here long but I've thought for a long time that broad church catch all parties don't work. So the current party system doesn't appeal to me anyway. If Labour decides to revert to centrism, then no reason for me to bother with it. In the future I hope for a time where we can have an electoral system which allows people the opportunity to vote for parties they believe in,not just because they are marginally preferable to the other lot. A choice between centrist Labour and the Tories is no choice at all. OK, we can agree on the need for electoral reform & something like the Portuguese spread of parties ? Almost anywhere has a better spread than we do. Our parties contain people who have absolutely nothing in common other than tribal dislike of the other party.
|
|
|
Post by casualobserver on Feb 23, 2020 1:27:41 GMT
Clearly I don't - but if your rationale is that I want it 'my way' or not at all then that's probably just as well. As I say, not a good look. I really don't think what things look like are what should matter. You haven't been here long but I've thought for a long time that broad church catch all parties don't work. So the current party system doesn't appeal to me anyway. If Labour decides to revert to centrism, then no reason for me to bother with it. In the future I hope for a time where we can have an electoral system which allows people the opportunity to vote for parties they believe in,not just because they are marginally preferable to the other lot. A choice between centrist Labour and the Tories is no choice at all. If you believe that it's important to change our electoral system then to effect such a change you really need to get involved with a political party which, through electoral success, has some chance of influencing decisions about changes to our electoral system. Bleating from the sidelines achieves precisely nothing.
|
|
|
Post by matureleft on Feb 23, 2020 10:05:50 GMT
There appears to be an acceleration and deepening of the suspension, and in some cases removal, of those who have failed to distinguish in their language between support for the Palestinian cause and anti-semitism. Since the left has substantial direction over the processes involved, from what one can tell, one can suggest some reasons: 1. The EHRC investigation. This must be quite advanced by now. 2. A recognition that Long Bailey (as the candidate most identified with both the elected and appointed leadership of the party) isn't helped by this and a desire to throw the most objectionable culprits under the bus to help her. She has distanced herself pretty clearly from this unpleasant legacy and actually did that, quietly, in the midst of the controversy. 3. Perhaps some recognition that tolerance of these opinions was doing the party electoral harm beyond the Jewish community. 4. Maybe, among some, a recognition that permitting this kind of behaviour and abuse was simply wrong. No.2 isn't the case. Although probably the majority of the people taking this decisions are Long-Bailey supporters - certainly the c person I know best is - these decisions are being arrived at strictly according to the evidence available to them. No factional considerations are being made. Points 1, 3 and 4 all probably have elements of truth to them. There is no witch-hunt. People who support the Palestinians without lapsing into antisemitism will not be disciplined. Those who simply can't tell the difference between supporting the Palestinians and insulting the Jewish people, either directly or by the use of known tropes, will face discipline. Not a single person expelled for antisemitism has been expelled wrongfully. There are legitimate arguments that Marc Wadsworth may have been a little harshly treated, but his behaviour was out of order and he was expelled for bringing the party into disrepute, not antisemitism. It is no good describing people like Jackie Walker or Tony Greenstein as "lifelong anti-racists" or excusing their lousy behaviour by saying they're Jewish - that's not relevant. I welcome the absence of these people from the Labour Party. Using antisemitism to campaign for the Palestinians does nothing to help the Palestinian people in their dreadful plight. I have today joined Na'amod, a Jewish organisation which campaigns ceaselessly against occupation while displaying zero tolerance for any antisemitic discourse. Largely agree but it's noticeable that whereas some objectionable behaviour was being tolerated or even defended by some on the left these offenders are now being abandoned to their legitimate fate. That is the "under the bus" reference. I'm sure that a process is being followed, as a process was being followed before. Absence of proper process can lead to legal challenge. It's just that the outcomes and the noise from defenders has changed.
|
|