UK General Election

[realspiel]

Wales to follow Scotland, both to be devolved in the not too near future, I don't want to be run by the South England elite.

[A_Northern_Soul]

Well. That's us fucked then.

[IanRedpoint]

speak for yourselves :/

If only we could. A liberal-minded socialist voice doesn't get a hearing round here. Fucking massive respect for Scotland speaking out for the change it clearly wants. In my constituency 1 in 5 people voted UKIP ffs. Second only to the predictable Tory majority. These are not my people.

[Negamuse]

We noticed going in to the polling station there were queues for the first time and thought it was a good thing... turns out they were there to vote Con/UKIP. :/

Sort of depressed how much of this campaign was fought on blatantly partisan media feeding narrative to a disengaged public that goes into the voting booth armed with disinformation and memes not facts. I've ranted about it before, now's not the time to do it again. Scotland is the proof of how badly England's fallen to that - Scotland they're politically engaged and look what they've managed to do, it's brilliant, but it shames us in comparison.

[A_Northern_Soul]

Beyond gutted this morning, as they creep ever closer to a full majority.

I voted No last September because I liked Britain - what it was and what it could be. I don't think I'm going to like the Britain that is going to emerge in the next five years.

Horrified to see UKIP pick up such a huge share of the votes in the north east too. Are there really so many small minded little Englanders out there?

Turkeys voting for Christmas...

[Mexicola]

Living down here in the South, its the smug crowing of the I'm alright Jack brigade that grates. I've never, ever, met a Tory supporter I liked.

[Negamuse]

And in 5 years time there won't be any wave of recognition, nobody weighing up what they were promised and what they got. No, it'll be infighting over the scraps of whatever's left, people kicking down, looking for people "less worthy" than them to recieve state services. I'll requote this in 2020.

Ah, fuck this, I'm in a foul mood today.

Living down here in the South, its the smug crowing of the I'm alright Jack brigade that grates. I've never, ever, met a Tory supporter I liked.

This too. I moved to where I could see fields for the good of my sanity but I'm weighing up the pros and cons of the people I have to live next door to to do it.

[Aerial Boundaries]

This is my personal soundtrack to the farce that was the 2015 election campaign.

Somewhere around the middle picture Milliband eating a sandwich.

[fujee]

Here's to another five years of brutal neoliberalism, systemic privatisation, deregulation and ideological attacks on those who have never warranted it. We're entering the wilderness folks, prepare the food banks.

Caroline got her seat though thank goodness, disappointing for Darren Hall in Bristol though. Still, Lucas will be the thorn in their side.

[Valotonin]

A day of mourning ensues...

^ It is good to see some leo kottke though.

[jcnporter]

speak for yourselves :/

If only we could. A liberal-minded socialist voice doesn't get a hearing round here. Fucking massive respect for Scotland speaking out for the change it clearly wants. In my constituency 1 in 5 people voted UKIP ffs. Second only to the predictable Tory majority. These are not my people.

It's a strange feeling, when you see yourself as liberal and progressive, and probably most of your friends and social circle are as well, hell most other people you meet seem decent and reasonable, it feels reasonable to assume that most people, at least of your age, are of a like mind. Then everyone votes Tory. Here in NI, I get that feeling every election.

[Aerial Boundaries]

I know this is really sappy, but I can't help but post it now I've remembered:

'Still round the corner there may wait
A new road or a secret gate,
And though we pass them by today,
Tomorrow we may come this way
And take the hidden paths that run
Towards the Moon or to the Sun.'

[thepastinsidepressant]

i havent a clue whats going on, but feel i should. who are the good guys? or have they all a bit of this and that and none perfect?

would leaving the EU be good or bad? Can the country manage millions? Id say the services would crack, well they are as it is. Eventually the world will become so over populated, spreading out, and the ship will sink, all of us with it aside from the few who can afford security.

in an ideal world etc. the land needs to be managed carefully, responsible care and nourish, don't over do it.

[louise]

in an ideal world other countries' governments would sort themselves out and stop screwing their own people over
as much as our government sucks, it could be so, so much worse

[fujee]

RIP Charles Kennedy, one of the few decent politicians in Westminster. Say what you like about the Lib Dems, his vision of what they should be, was at one point, the only viable centre-left party with some power to challenge to two party centre-ground stalemate. Not to mention that he opposed invading Iraq, like a proper social democrat would do. Above all, he seemed like a decent, principled man, a sad day indeed. Apparently he was heartbroken that he lost his seat

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/201 ... es-aged-55

[Aerial Boundaries]

I don't usually watch the news (yes I know, a person interested in politics arguably should regularly watch or read the news), but I've just seen this interview:



Seems like our best shot for a decent labour candidate next time if he does make party leader. Takes a clear stand against austerity, doesn't take shit, and completely lacks the cheesy face-punchable evasive humour of everyone else.

He holds up really well here against this tory-minded twat. I couldn't believe it when he said that Corbyn wasn't allowed to answer his question if he took too long, what the fuck is the point then?

Granted I am not familiar enough with him yet, this is just from what I've seen recently.

[Betacord]

Dare I take the plunge into discussion? I was actually going to post something on the grey morning of the General Election result, but decided against it at the time. That ship has sailed, I feel.

So... In light of AB's post:

He holds up really well here against this tory-minded twat. I couldn't believe it when he said that Corbyn wasn't allowed to answer his question if he took too long, what the fuck is the point then?

Agreed; that was appalling interviewing by Krishnan Guru-Murthy. Not the first time, either. Yet, I think some other parts of the media would way outdo him for genuine bias. You know someone is proposing a real alternative to the Tories (and Labour's Tory-lite bunch) when elements of the right all start thinking of ways to discredit them, and there are signs that's happening here already.

Sections of our majority right-wing press (first big disadvantage for Corbyn) claim he is 'unelectable' and Labour will be 'doomed' to lose in 2020 if he does get elected - headline-grabbing words maybe - but they offer no rational explanation of exactly how he'd lose so spectacularly when compared to the other candidates. Indeed, it's a strange paradox: someone whose ideas clearly speak to many people where others do not, and who is apparently doing well in the contest so far with more backing than others - yet is painted as somehow more 'unelectable' than candidate(s) with considerably less support? Justification of that strange logic, please...

I understand he's effectively said that he won't get into bed with the press; perhaps that helps explain things. But we do need a leader as free from media influence as possible.

The right-wing dismissal of him as a joke has even gone as far as Tories being encouraged to actually vote for him... But, I note that's more to mess with those in the top ranks of the Labour party; they are not Corbyn supporters and refuse to vote for him. So the odds are against him on at least a couple of fronts. On which note, it's sad that many in the house did not want him this race to begin with. A strong political voice for those without one, is vital; too many of the same beliefs are not good for politics.

If Labour went in the direction of Harriet Harman (acting leader until Sep) or the Blairite candidate Liz Kendall, abandoning principles to become Tories in all but name (in their mistaken belief that it's how they'll win the election - it isn't; didn't they learn this mistake from Scotland?), then their traditional supporters would no doubt desert them in droves. I can't understand how they think that's a good move.

Corbyn is the only prominent Labour MP of late who has refused to buy into the Tories' false argument basis that austerity is necessary and that the economy is the most important thing. That's plain ideology they have been drilling into people's heads for 5 years, trying to make it accepted as some sort of truth; it isn't. Tory austerity is, however, disproportionately hitting the poorest. We have to ask, what's so loony about putting people's lives before the economy? Or wanting reduce the obscene gulf between the richest and poorest in society?

Seems like our best shot for a decent labour candidate next time if he does make party leader. Takes a clear stand against austerity, doesn't take shit, and completely lacks the cheesy face-punchable evasive humour of everyone else.

It's possible to become a member for £3 and vote, though you may already be aware of this, I'm not sure.

I have yet to decide whether to do so, but in any event, I agree. It does seem to me that Corbyn, though not the greatest orator, would be the best leader by far to actually oppose, challenge and pick apart the Tory agenda with the scrutiny it should be given - and not let them utterly off the hook to continue conning the public like Labour under Harman has allowed. Then we'll have had, at the very least, more than 4 years of the Tories being properly held to account by a leader who actually stands for an alternative to their dogma. As said, the odds seem against it - but we'll have to see.

Something that might be of interest... Corbyn's response to the recent Budget (taken from the Commons web feed; it skips / repeats in one or two places - but worth a listen to get an idea of how much more informed and challenging his response is compared to the betrayal of principles that came from the front bench):

[Aerial Boundaries]

Agreed, though I would stress that it isn't about the economy being less important, so much as it being that austerity demonstrably does not improve the economy. Being one of the most austerity mad European countries throughout the recession, we have consistently lagged behind the others in recovery.

I remember reading a recent report which stated that quite a few major economists (not that it might mean much), now think that austerity is a terrible strategy, that there is too much emphasis put on the deficit as even successful economies are pretty much always in debt due to the constant greed and lust for growth in capitalism, and that the way out of depression is to invest. It is also my opinion that austerity was only chosen because it is a sneaky method of scratching backs and putting money in pockets: cut public funding, outsource to the private sector.

I think it is mistaken to say that the economy is less or more important than people, because our quality of life depends on it anyway. It's just a case here today of most people being left out of the economic process partially or entirely, to everyone's detriment except the rich (though we'll see if it truly benefits them in the long term...) I hope I'm putting my point across clearly. I'm definitely not saying that people and quality of life aren't my number one priority.

I'm not going to even get into the whole benefits narrative which is just such a load of nasty, malicious, and downright malevolent bollocks. As if most of our welfare budget isn't spent on those in work, with disabilities or with pensions!

In terms of the becoming a member thing, I am not prepared to do that. I know little about what is going on with Labour as of the last election, and I've only just encountered Corbyn. Maybe things will change.

Just watching the vid at the moment, he comes off more and more as deeply angry at the whole affair which is fantastic.

[jcnporter]

Jeremy Corbyn seems like the only hope for Labour, post-Blair, returning to anything like socialism, so how he's doing so far is a pleasant surprise.
He strikes me as a little 'traditional' left and by that I mean a bit too 'statist' and 'my enemy's friend is my friend' on foreign policy, for me personally, but I was encouraged by his performance in the Channel 4 interview above.
Notwithstanding the minor meltdown in the middle, he was concise, rational and insightful, explaining well his policy on nationalisation in particular - a subject which 'capitalism realism' has put so beyond the pale that many on the left end up sounding like the 'looney' stereotype when they talk about it.
Also the bit at the end where he highlighted how banks are more interested in investing in property rental than industry - absolutely spot on, gets right to the core of the problems with the economy at the moment.
For me there's really two main things in his favour - he comes across as an antidote to the current generation of media-trained soundbite parrots (Tory front bench, Miliband, all the other candidates, all of the Labour leadership who apparently hate him) and he sounds like he just might be able to explain how socialism works for the economy - something that the left have spectacularly failed to do in recent years and the main thing that lost Miliband the election.
It's embarrassing how easily the right have been able to conflate socialism with economic failure in the public's minds - really pisses me off. The arguments are easy to make -

Welfare is essential to a consumer economy as it gives people the security to spend rather than save.
Market principles don't work for essential services, such as water provision, that are natural monopolies.
Socialisation of health care is good for business - many corporates in the US have massive health insurance bills for current and former employees that they'd love to get rid of.
Managerialism and focus on profit simply doesn't work in provision of some services, such as health. There is no actual structural or inherent reason why the public sector should be less efficient than the private.
Talking about 'redistribution' is wrong - too easy to conflate with government interventionism and 'stealing' people's wealth - what the left should be talking about is why distribution is unfair in the first place i.e. treating land and natural resources as private property. A land value tax, for example, is not 'redistribution'.

When have any of these arguments been made recently by the left, let alone Labour? There's no need to just rely on emotive stuff like 'people are more important than markets', no matter how true it might be. They really need to get their shit together.
One final point - the Greek shambles has shown the real face of the EU as a corporate/banking system shill rather than the socialist utopia that the right love to paint it as - something I always suspected - why aren't Labour blindsiding the Tories on this? They're utterly inept at the moment - let's hope Corbyn can do at least something about it.

[Aerial Boundaries]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p02y2ffn

Despite being utterly broke, I've joined Labour in order to vote for him (even though he said himself that he doesn't want people joining just for that, I am fundamentally a socialist so I think it's fair game for me really).

Watching him very closely these days. The important thing in terms of his public credibility and avoidance of typical Tory slander is that he isn't just saying what want to hear, but also offering the methods by which they will be accomplished. Which is a basically a no brainer anyway as it mainly comes down to investment in public services and small-medium businesses and making sure corporate tax is actually being paid.