PJV3
Member
Union reform was coming anyway, but I don't like the way the problems of the 70s seem to all get dumped on the left and unions, or the attempt to turn the period into some apocalyptic wasteland.
UK General Election - 8th June 2017 |OT| - The Red Wedding
- Thread starter Jezbollah
- Start date
- Status
Union reform was coming anyway, but I don't like the way the problems of the 70s seem to all get dumped on the left and unions, or the attempt to turn the period into some apocalyptic wasteland.
blazinglord
Member
Well old Labour will always be associated with the winter of discontent. They won the 1974 election as strong proponents of strong trade union power. So when unions started causing problems with three day weeks etc, the public blamed Labour for it and voted in Thatcher.
Also, there's a reason why Callaghan has largely been forgotten about. He was out of touch and a dreadful PM.
https://youtu.be/dX06xqN6710
CyclopsRock
Member
Sure, and of course it's easy to characterise as shitty (and I do, despite the fact I was born in 1988). But the guy I was quoting said Thatcher fucked the country with market capitalism and decimating primary industries. It's hard to imagine a scenario in which a UK that turned it's back on market capitalism in the late 70's (rather than pursuing it under Thatcher) and one that continued to back primary industries even as they were becoming increasingly reliant on government aid to exist is one that would have lead us to a more prosperous 90's, 00's and 10's.
Huw_Dawson
Member
It's interesting that the short- and medium- term damage caused by Thatcher was partially/mostly repaired by New Labour, whereas the small set of good things that were done (the common market, growth in financial sector/service economy, reigned-in unions etc) are now being opposed by one party or the other.
Both parties want us back in the 70's.
Out on the doorstop today talking to voters. The vast majority of people we talked to, at least in marginal Hornsey and Wood Green, are undecided. More people said "definitely Lib Dem" than "definitely Labour" though.
In a lot of marginals I do think it is going to come down to undecided voters, especially undecided Labour voters. Lots of people are saying they'd vote Labour right now, but when they have to make their minds up after the manifestos are out and the TV broadcasts are concluded, which way will they go?
Obviously my lot hope that once many Remain voters have the comparisons up (Labour/Tories hard Brexit, LDs soft Brexit or Remain) that should get a lot of people to become more friendly to voting LD, especially in areas where voting LD can get an LD MP elected.
Both parties want us back in the 70's.
Out on the doorstop today talking to voters. The vast majority of people we talked to, at least in marginal Hornsey and Wood Green, are undecided. More people said "definitely Lib Dem" than "definitely Labour" though.
In a lot of marginals I do think it is going to come down to undecided voters, especially undecided Labour voters. Lots of people are saying they'd vote Labour right now, but when they have to make their minds up after the manifestos are out and the TV broadcasts are concluded, which way will they go?
Obviously my lot hope that once many Remain voters have the comparisons up (Labour/Tories hard Brexit, LDs soft Brexit or Remain) that should get a lot of people to become more friendly to voting LD, especially in areas where voting LD can get an LD MP elected.
Yeah, because that's what I'm saying here isn't it?
Just to reiterate. What I'm saying is that the Tories are using the political capital of Labour leaving the 'working class' behind (whether they did or not is moot) and saying that 'we are your party now'.
This is clearly bullshit, given the consensus on the 1980s onwards, but Labour is too incompetent, too inept, too scared to call them on it.
Is that clear now?
And who nows what an allohistorical Britain looks like? We'll be saying the same about BREXIT in 25 years time.
Jezbollah
Member
I think Labour have done really well in the campaign so far. Much better than the Tories.
CyclopsRock
Member
Basically, yeah. I mean you said, re: the working classes, "it was the Tories who fucked this with market capitalism and decimation of primary industries in the 1970s and 1980s" so it's hard not to read into this that you think they'd be better off without market capitalisation and the "decimation" (by which I assume you mean "removal of state aid") of primary industries.
there was diane abbott's number trouble too.
it's more that labour are actually running a normal campaign. they clearly have a grid with a new news story set for every single day till polling day and corbyn is going across the country meeting voters.
the tories have chosen to replace a traditional campaign with just endlessly repeating 'strong and stable' and 'coalition of chaos'
the lib dems? where are they? did someone forget to tell them there is an election? i thought tim farron was meant to be showing jeremy corbyn what REAL opposition looks like lol
then ukip just got swallowed by the tories, the greens by labour and have no relevance
idk i think it's just keeping it simple. they know their huge advantage is that corbyn is seen as weak and useless and may is seen as strong and decisive and we're about to enter tough eu negotiations. talking about literally anything else is a distraction from that and only news junkies care that you are annoying.
i think it's a good strategy and the message discipline has been exceptional, it's just an infuriating one
there also seems to be a deliberate strategy by may to avoid being held to any pre-election commitments like the cameron tax pledge in 2015 which is quite sensible as it gives her the most freedom to handle the currently unknown repercussions of brexit
Good points.
And thinking about it going for a tsunami rather than a landslide or getting somewhere in between isn't actually that important.
The opposition is decimated either way, the majority huge. And the effect of it all on Labour is as much to do with Labour as the scale of the defeat.
Randy Lanzarote
Member
I think Labour are currently on a 'Post-Unofficial-Manifesto launch at the moment, so the momentum (haaa) has been with them for most of last week.
If the Tories can release a manifesto with a couple of working-class friendly policies I think it swings back to them.
But so far they are playing it very safe, very stable... Labour are having to go on the offensive as they've got a lot of ground to cover, so they can afford to sit back and coast until June 8th. The only mis-step was Boris' 'Mugwump' comment, thanks to which he's been firmly locked back in the broom cupboard until further notice.
You may have also forgotten a few media appearances by Diane Abbott.
If the Tories can release a manifesto with a couple of working-class friendly policies I think it swings back to them.
But so far they are playing it very safe, very stable... Labour are having to go on the offensive as they've got a lot of ground to cover, so they can afford to sit back and coast until June 8th. The only mis-step was Boris' 'Mugwump' comment, thanks to which he's been firmly locked back in the broom cupboard until further notice.
You may have also forgotten a few media appearances by Diane Abbott.
You may have also forgotten a few media appearances by Diane Abbott.
I had, I do try to avoid her.
Just seen that clip of Emily Thornberry calling out Michael Fallon on his bollocks.
You have to appreciate that kind of response in light of the absolute shite that goes unchallenged in the media and on the side of buses these days. Just cut him dead and I bet he won't try that again.
You have to appreciate that kind of response in light of the absolute shite that goes unchallenged in the media and on the side of buses these days. Just cut him dead and I bet he won't try that again.
Theonik
Member
It's a risky strategy, but if the country is willing to give May a carte blanch anyway to do whatever she wishes then they deserve what May is to unleash.
Pancake Mix
Copied someone else's pancake recipe
I'm really curious if Labour can keep their seat in Scotland.
War Peaceman
You're a big guy.
There's no point defending, just attack. It is the only thing that works.
Billy_Pilgrim
Member
An actual, card carrying communist is now head of Labour's campaign.
Aye but she has also met Assad and didn't care to mention, so they've even fucked up that line of moralising.
Aye but she has also met Assad and didn't care to mention, so they've even fucked up that line of moralising.
How benevolent!
Theonik
Member
I don't think the intent was moralising. They were pointing out the hypocrisy of the particular accusations. That they might have also been in the same position earlier is not relevant, since they aren't the ones painting this narrative.
Royal_Phalanx
Member
What prosperity exists now outside big cities? Trickle down economics have created great GDP increases but little of that wealth 'trickles down'. People in the economic depressed areas will disagree with you rather strongly. Their jobs and incomes have been wiped out and the government has wholly failed to help them adjust to the change. And, of course is why Brexit happened, because they somehow blamed the EU for it.
When you worship the free market too much (US Republicans, cough, cough) it leads to trouble. The US is cutting entitlements even more recently. There's only so much right wing policy a person could possibly defend.
Like the pittance that is the US Family and Medical Leave Act. "Well, they can't fire you, well they can if they claim your job is essential to be filled so they often do, and they don't have to pay you, but hey, universal medical leave!"
Edit: the greatest trick played by the Tories/US Republicans was in destroying the basis of working class America but successfully blaming it on immigrants and minorities.
War Peaceman
You're a big guy.
errr did they not think this one through???
Air Zombie Meat
Member
Take a year off to care for a sick relative. They'll need someone to fight for them when they're declared fit for work. The state isn't going to look after them or treat them with respect so do it yourself proles!
Ohhhh 12 months unpaid sabbatical that likely won't be backed up with legislation but some voluntary "double tick" like scheme.
I could already request sabbaticals at every semi decent job I've had.
Yes you too can look after your old age relatives for the bargain price of all your savings for an entire year!
Now lets have a bit of the thick of it and realise this is what a lot of people will think...
https://youtu.be/PNRjaS4lTq8?t=622
Now lets have a bit of the thick of it and realise this is what a lot of people will think...
https://youtu.be/PNRjaS4lTq8?t=622
Carers allowance is criminally​ under paid, considering the amount relatives save the state. Especially with the incoming demographic bomb.
CyclopsRock
Member
Sure, but obviously there's no prosperity in economically depressed areas, that's what makes them economically depressed. The question is whether there are more of those areas (or more of those people) now, given the huge expansion in the services sector, financial services, creative industries, tech etc. It's obviously hard to know what would have happened in this alternative version of history but I don't think anyone seriously thinks we could still be a significant industrial power. So the question is what the difference would have been
War Peaceman
You're a big guy.
worth noting how ludicrous the daily mail's tory propaganda is on that front page.
like the tories or not that policy is just shit
like the tories or not that policy is just shit
Theonik
Member
I guess the answer depends on what your opinion of New Labour is.
In some ways what Blair started and did to a reasonable level of success was his effort to re-distribute the gains and prosperity from this new economy to the areas that were affected by the decline in industry. Cardiff's recovery can be largely traced back to those policies. One could even argue Blair didn't go far enough.
Now an alternative history where the UK government decides to keep these industries and slowly phase them out while trying to invest in alternatives in those areas rather than hope the free market would care for those people might have been quite different. Hell, I'd even argue that if Iraq hadn't happened or better yet, if Al Gore had won the 2000 election, we might be living in a much more prosperous world today indeed.
whyamihere
Banned
So Labour will almost surely lose, but they might avoid a completely blowout:
Problem is the complete collapse of UKIP means that even if Labour could get back up to around 35%, the Tories would be in even that much of a better place.
Labour only got 30.4% in 2015.
Problem is the complete collapse of UKIP means that even if Labour could get back up to around 35%, the Tories would be in even that much of a better place.
Labour only got 30.4% in 2015.
Theonik
Member
This isn't painting a particularly useful picture if you can't map this out in terms of constituencies. Hell as unlikely as it sounds FPTP even makes it possible for Labour to win an election despite getting less votes. (Tories might get more landslides but lose marginals etc)So Labour will almost surely lose, but they might avoid a completely blowout:
Problem is the complete collapse of UKIP means that even if Labour could get back up to around 35%, the Tories would be in even that much of a better place.
Labour only got 30.4% in 2015.
What I find even more interesting, is that despite people arguing labour was unelectable and that Jeremy Corbyn is disliked by the public, he was polling pretty great before the referendum. It seems that Brexit has really taken over this election to the detriment of any kind of decent political discourse.
whyamihere
Banned
It was more that UKIP was polling very well before the election and depressing the Tories's numbers. But yes, Labour was like at 35%.
Theonik
Member
That is not strictly true. Only labour and UKIP were up. The means that the Conservatives lost voters to both UKIP and Labour. In fact while the Tories have a huge lead, Labour got a big uptick from UKIP's collapse.
Pretty sure they thought it through just fine.
The Tories are selling headlines, not trying to make life better for ordinary people.
QuicheFontaine
Member
Maybe this is some American thing, but if your job isn't "essential to be filled", why does the job exist?
jimbobsmells
Member
'Lib Dems promise repeal of snooping powers'
Ok, you've got my vote.
Ok, you've got my vote.
Conservatives: "We're putting everyone that votes LD on the watch list. What are you hiding, huh?"
D
Deleted member 231381
Unconfirmed Member
It means on a day to day basis. If I disappeared for a few days, the basic service my company provides could still tick over, although it would be significantly more difficult and they might get some angry calls. If a nurse disappeared for a few days from an already busy ward, there will people who simply don't get treated.
jimbobsmells
Member
You joke, but there was a guardian article at the weekend that blamed the Ransomware attack on Tory underfunding of the NHS. I stated in the comments that it's also because agencies like the NSA and GCHQ should not be trusted with 'back doors' into our computers and mobile devices. It was promptly deleted.
So I wrote it again. Deleted almost immediately.
And again. Deleted again.
So I wrote just one word - GCHQ. Deleted, and all my other comments on the article to other posters were also removed. Not kidding or exaggerating.
Ravensmash
Member
QuicheFontaine
Member
Ah, for a few days, that's fair enough. Everyone goes on holiday after all.
However, when we're talking about a one-year sabbatical I think it's easier to say if your colleagues could 'cope' for that whole time without you then you were never really needed in the first place.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked