chiefdave
Well-Known Member
Not a surprise really thought is it? He went down the route last time of being inclusive and not just going with his cronies and they stabbed him in the back.
RIP Labour (6 Viewers)
- Thread starter Grendel
- Start date
Philosoraptor
Well-Known Member
A weak opposition is better than no opposition at all. The death of the Labour Party as people know it under Blair and Brown was caused by Blair and Brown. If your taking your party into the centre ground and losing your core voters to apathy because they can't tell the difference between the Conservatives and yourself, or they no longer support your views then you should be called out on this.
It seems the self styled moderates a wonderful tone as East Germany described themselves as a Democratic Republic don't seem to be as moderate as they let on. In fact they seem to be on the right of the party.
The Iraq War.
The Human Rights abuses of the Blair/Brown Government which kept ending up in the ECHR
There is no point having power if you don't know what to do when in power. These factors far out weigh any good these people did in power.
The idea of treating people equal doesn't make the grade when your treating everyone equally bad.
These people didn't know, still don't know, or choose to ignore the dangers of Utilitarianism. They put forward the idea that they lack any moral framework.
Let's look at state of the local Labour Party in Coventry.
Entering into a WMCA without a referendum. Doing everything they can to deny the people a vote. Bringing in DemSoc, which was nothing more then a public relations company pushing Government legislation. An absolute shoddy consultation. States that no powers would be moved from local government to WMCA, so we wouldn't need a referendum, and then moves powers from local government to whoever is the new Mayor.
Major cuts to local services, turning local services into a postcode lottery of where you actually live in the United Kingdom. Getting rid of treating everyone equally by bringing in the term 'devolution' so your local/Govt services will be different to those in other parts of the country.
Getting your 'man' as the Labour contender in the mayoral race denying all new members a vote so there will be 4/5 more years of this crap.
Even describing a referendum as populist. (What a shambles.)
It's seems the only people pushing austerity now are the rebels in the Labour Party which Coventry Labour does seem to be supporting.
Also, nice to see the local Labour Party didn't bother to ballot their members on who to vote for between Corbyn/Owen. Just spoke for themselves stating Corbyn was bad and Owen is good, and decided their own say was more important then the people who support or vote Labour.
To change the Labour Party these local Labour councillors and the people who run Labour in Coventry are part of the problem, not the solution. They need to be stood against when the next round of Labour councillors are chosen.
I am sure they realise this and are just waiting for the chop.
Labour members want change. They are the past, not the future.
It seems the self styled moderates a wonderful tone as East Germany described themselves as a Democratic Republic don't seem to be as moderate as they let on. In fact they seem to be on the right of the party.
The Iraq War.
The Human Rights abuses of the Blair/Brown Government which kept ending up in the ECHR
There is no point having power if you don't know what to do when in power. These factors far out weigh any good these people did in power.
The idea of treating people equal doesn't make the grade when your treating everyone equally bad.
These people didn't know, still don't know, or choose to ignore the dangers of Utilitarianism. They put forward the idea that they lack any moral framework.
Let's look at state of the local Labour Party in Coventry.
Entering into a WMCA without a referendum. Doing everything they can to deny the people a vote. Bringing in DemSoc, which was nothing more then a public relations company pushing Government legislation. An absolute shoddy consultation. States that no powers would be moved from local government to WMCA, so we wouldn't need a referendum, and then moves powers from local government to whoever is the new Mayor.
Major cuts to local services, turning local services into a postcode lottery of where you actually live in the United Kingdom. Getting rid of treating everyone equally by bringing in the term 'devolution' so your local/Govt services will be different to those in other parts of the country.
Getting your 'man' as the Labour contender in the mayoral race denying all new members a vote so there will be 4/5 more years of this crap.
Even describing a referendum as populist. (What a shambles.)
It's seems the only people pushing austerity now are the rebels in the Labour Party which Coventry Labour does seem to be supporting.
Also, nice to see the local Labour Party didn't bother to ballot their members on who to vote for between Corbyn/Owen. Just spoke for themselves stating Corbyn was bad and Owen is good, and decided their own say was more important then the people who support or vote Labour.
To change the Labour Party these local Labour councillors and the people who run Labour in Coventry are part of the problem, not the solution. They need to be stood against when the next round of Labour councillors are chosen.
I am sure they realise this and are just waiting for the chop.
Labour members want change. They are the past, not the future.
Last edited:
clint van damme
Well-Known Member
I think you're saying that poverty in this country is relative and not on the same scale as in some countries, which I'd agree with.
But I don't agree that a lot of people choose poverty. I'm shocked by the amount of hard working people who are really struggling and in some cases using food banks, and this is people I have met personally.
Of course there will be those who don't want to help themselves.
mrtrench
Well-Known Member
I think we agree with each other. Nobody thinks "Hmmm, I'd like poverty" but some people through their own actions put themselves in the position of not having the basics (drug and alcohol abuse, spending lots of money on a luxury that means they cannot pay the gas bill.... Yes, many families work and struggle to get by - many people have been there including me - however I wouldn't term that poverty: despite the hardship they eat, they have somewhere to live and they have heat. If that's your definition of poverty then I'd agree that this is not chosen.
I think this current "food bank" thing is over-used as a stick to beat ourselves with. If you think about it, they are an excellent thing that helps the most vulnerable so that they don't have the kind of poverty I'm using as a definition. If you go to a supermarket 20 minutes before they close they knock all the perishable items down to 20p or similar and some people time their shop to go there - sometimes pushing and shoving takes place. But if you look at them, most don't look poor. There is one guy who lives in my city who uses his engorged stomach to lever people out of the way. I've seen him in the car park climbing into a Mercedes. Shame on him, I say - he clearly doesn't need 20p food and is taking it from people who may need it.
What I would like to see is more help for the mentally ill. They seem to be the most vulnerable and don't choose to be ill. There is a charity called Emmaus which gives them a home and a job working in their charity shop. I love this but wish the state would build more.
Last edited:
Captain Dart
Well-Known Member
D
Deleted member 5849
Guest
Hmm, *she* didn't actually say it. She said that 'some people will judge that on balance...'.
That's true, as well. Same as you get people who are pro Stalin, because he's done a more effective job of dictating than Hitler ever did. wrt Mao, some women in China will thank him for freeing them from subjugation. Note again, the phrasing of this where *I* am not saying that...
Anyway, notwithstanding that, Diane Abbot is a ve-ry odd choice to have anywhere near a top post. I can be as left leaning as you like, and still think her a nutter!
That's true, as well. Same as you get people who are pro Stalin, because he's done a more effective job of dictating than Hitler ever did. wrt Mao, some women in China will thank him for freeing them from subjugation. Note again, the phrasing of this where *I* am not saying that...
Anyway, notwithstanding that, Diane Abbot is a ve-ry odd choice to have anywhere near a top post. I can be as left leaning as you like, and still think her a nutter!
Captain Dart
Well-Known Member
I wondered where they'd gone..
http://www.emmaus.org.uk/coventry_w..._red_lane_shop_-_emmaus_coventry_warwickshire
Captain Dart
Well-Known Member
Its a very odd thing to say anyway, might as well say the same of Stalin, Hitler or Pol Pot, I'm sure there will be nutters who admire them.
clint van damme
Well-Known Member
Thatchers mate.
Captain Dart
Well-Known Member
Hypocrisy alert!
mrtrench
Well-Known Member
How can you say that? There is absolutely no similarity between Thatcher and Pol Pot and to imply there is softens the evil that Pol Pol inflicted on his people.
clint van damme
Well-Known Member
I didn't say she was like him, but she refused to condemn the Khemer Rouge and along with others, (including the US), insisted they keep their seat in the UN.
Think the point I'm making, (in response to Captain Dart saying there will always be nutters who admire the likes of Hitler and Pol pot), is no matter how deplorable the regime, they'll always have a western politician of some political hue who they can call a friend.
Grendel
Well-Known Member
Like Mr Corbyn and Hamas perhaps or the delightful Mr McDonnell and the IRA
clint van damme
Well-Known Member
exactly.
Captain Dart
Well-Known Member
Here we go.. schism under way...
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/201...e-shadow-shadow-cabinet-to-circumvent-jeremy/
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/201...e-shadow-shadow-cabinet-to-circumvent-jeremy/