Corbynomics: A Dystopia

antrobus

Generali wrote: »

I was just wondering why you stated that Mr Corbyn got more votes than Mr Blair when it seems that you knew that wasn't the case. .....

The 1994 Labour leadership contest was the first held under the principle of ‘One Member One Vote’. Certainly Wikipedia suggests that over 750,000 affilliated members voted in that election, and 400,000 of the chose Blair, whilst there were only 71,500 affiliate votes in total in the 2015 leadership contest.

Goodness knows whether Wikipedia is right or not. But it certainly provides substance to your claim.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Labour_Party_%28UK%29_leadership_election,_1994

Generali wrote: »

...Why did you do that old boy?....

Possibly for the same reason that he claimed that Burnham, Cooper, and Kendall want to abolish the mimum wage.

Generali wrote: »

..The PLP seems not to represent the membership any more and I suspect that it'll be the PLP that will have to give way. ....

The PLP isn't supposed to represent the membership of the Labour Party; it's members are supposed to represent their constituents.

setmefree2

ruggedtoast wrote: »

I'll bear that in mind when I am knocking on doors in Britain.

I hope someone asks you how Labour intends to clear the deficit when all they seem to want to do is chuck money around....????

antrobus

ruggedtoast wrote: »

I did not say that Cooper et al want to abolish the minimum wage, at least openly, I said they were the preferred candidates of the 1%.

Yeah, right.:)

And besides. Since slightly over 50% of the actual membership of the Labour Party collectively voted for them, wouldn't that mean that they agreed with this 1% of yours?

ruggedtoast wrote: »

...But of course it doesn't really matter what Corbyn says because the MSM will never report it accurately and people who read the MSM will never believe they are being misled, apparently....

MSM? !!!!!! is MSM? Methylsulfonylmethane? MoneySuperMarket?
What has it got to do with the price of fish?

setmefree2

ruggedtoast wrote: »

Meaning that if any of the Blairites did launch the coup they keep threatening but are too scared to actually try for, there would be more than twice as many of us to vote for Jeremy and he would just thrash them even more humiliatingly.

Which is why Labour is doomed and will become a mere shadow of its former self.

You must be real proud to be part of that. Bless.

antrobus

ruggedtoast wrote: »

...Sadly they didn't, but since the inaugration of Jeremy numbers are up by record amounts. Meaning that if any of the Blairites did launch the coup they keep threatening but are too scared to actually try for, there would be more than twice as many of us to vote for Jeremy and he would just thrash them even more humiliatingly. ...

I think that the whole point of a 'coup' would be to get Saint Jeremy to resign. Once he resigns and creates a vacancy, there is no way in this world that the current PLP would make the same mistake again. So you'd be faced with a choice between that Chuka fella and Tristram whatisname.

Filo25

ruggedtoast wrote: »

It would make a lot more sense if the "moderates" just went and joined the Tory Party, with whom they appear to be in complete agreement on every issue from Trident to welfare cuts anyway.

I personally don't have a lot of time for people who think that housing people, looking after the vulnerable, the NHS, and asking employers to put some of their profits into tax and salaries rather than offshore accounts, is "extreme left". So I dont think they'd be missed.

You seem to get this a lot from the more Corbynista wing of the Labour party, an obsession with ideological purity, and complete indifference to actual electability.

I can only assume its based on the assumption that they are so obviously right, that eventually everyone will be educated to see the rightness of their cause, even though the general public have not shown much inclination to do so in recent history.

I find the whole thing a bit bizarre to be honest, there's not much evidence that Britain will ever vote to elect a PM who comes from the hard left of British politics, unless they are truly exceptional, Corbyn lacks the charisma and intelligence to overcome that huge hurdle.

Conrad

ruggedtoast wrote: »

It would make a lot more sense if the "moderates" just went and joined the Tory Party, with whom they appear to be in complete agreement on every issue from Trident to welfare cuts anyway.

This has to be a contender for urban myth, number one.


I watch PMQ's week in week out, and in the main Labour MP's call for more welfare, less / no cuts and more spending. I keep a list of Labour spending demands, it's huge. No matter what the topic, more spending is always the solution. Labour MP's in depressed areas for decades blame the Tories and call for more welfare instead of putting their backs into local enterprise. What an effing waste.


Contrast this to Tory MP's that want to highlight local enterprise and success. personal responsibility and work being the best welfare ticket known to man,

gadgetmind

Filo25 wrote: »

even though the general public have not shown much inclination to do so in recent history.

They don't tend to talk to the general public hence shock when they lost so flamboyantly.

Filo25

Conrad wrote: »

This has to be a contender for urban myth, number one.


I watch PMQ's week in week out, and in the main Labour MP's call for more welfare, less / no cuts and more spending. I keep a list of Labour spending demands, it's huge.


Contrast this to Tory MP's that want to highlight local enterprise and success.

On the other hand many Tory MPs seem oblivious to areas where the market fails ordinary people and the state does need to intervene.

Neither party has all the answers to the problems that Britain still faces, the issues the NHS faces at present aren't a great reflection on the Tories, no doubt we will soon get the clarion call that it is unsavable and only the market can save the day, you know like it does in the US, a health system which must be close to the worst in the world in terms of value for money!

I'm one of those in the middle who agrees with both parties in various areas!

Labour need to get rid of Corbyn and re-evaluate what they really stand for going forwards if they want to be relevant again, Corbyn is trying to sell a message which was more relevant in the 80's than it is today and it still wasn't popular enough to win an election then.

Conrad

Filo25 wrote: »

I can only assume its based on the assumption that they are so obviously right, that eventually everyone will be educated to see the rightness of their cause, even though the general public have not shown much inclination to do so in recent history.

The socialist brigade has long diagnosed all those that disagree as suffering with that everyday ailment “false consciousness”.


This higher power seeks to enlighten this passive ignorant electorate by employing 'facts & evidence' (anything but in fact) in order to awaken it to glorious socialism.


In the meantime Newsnight last night laid bare the ineptitude wrought on Venezuela suffering complete chaos, 141% inflation, staple goods unavailable, day long bread queues.

Socialists will never understand Human nature


http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b0717tbb/newsnight-16022016


26 minutes in - Venezuela