UK Politics Thread XIII: The Brexit Ship Departs

[Dumb Ideologies]

The traditional Labour base died with Thatcher when large sections of the working class were bought off with cheap sell offs of housing stock and Americanised dreams of opportunity.

New Labour was more New than Labour - the appeal was the aura of freshness and new ideas carefully coordinated to be acceptable to Thatcherite tabloids. How much was Corbynism really a groundswell of support for social democratic ideas and how much of it was more specifically a delayed backlash against the most austerity-focused politics in any major economy and the deeply inadequate campaigning of Theresa May?

Labour hasn't one a political conversation for a long while. It's very difficult to see a plausible coalition of demographics, constituency geography and so on which leads to Labour winning in anything other than a one-off disaster campaign for the Tories, to be flipped back at the next election.

What Labour needs is a figure as capable of political teaching as Thatcher - as much as her messages may have been simplistic and often incoherent and as much as her policies caused immense long term social damage. Someone who can inspire political realignment and tell a compelling different story. I've not seen any evidence of any kind of a figure and until one turns up you're probably looking a getting in for a term every half-dozen elections or so.

I'm not sure that running towards the centre centre left or running hard left is inherently any more viable. Starmer is not inspirational, neither are any of the potential replacements. We're choosing between flavours of loss.

[The New California Republic]

A man has been arrested after a "serious" fire at the Findhorn eco-community in Moray.

Emergency services, including six fire appliances, were called to the Findhorn Foundation in the early hours of Monday.

The foundation said "extensive damage" was caused to the community centre and main sanctuary, but that "thankfully" no-one was hurt.

Police said a man, aged 49, had been arrested. Inquiries are ongoing.

The Findhorn Foundation was formally registered as a Scottish charity in 1972, 10 years after it began life with just a single caravan.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland- ... d-56719211

Sad to see this, as I once lived near to it and visited it quite regularly.

[The Nihilistic view]

The traditional Labour base died with Thatcher when large sections of the working class were bought off with cheap sell offs of housing stock and Americanised dreams of opportunity.

New Labour was more New than Labour - the appeal was the aura of freshness and new ideas carefully coordinated to be acceptable to Thatcherite tabloids. How much was Corbynism really a groundswell of support for social democratic ideas and how much of it was more specifically a delayed backlash against the most austerity-focused politics in any major economy and the deeply inadequate campaigning of Theresa May?

Labour hasn't one a political conversation for a long while. It's very difficult to see a plausible coalition of demographics, constituency geography and so on which leads to Labour winning in anything other than a one-off disaster campaign for the Tories, to be flipped back at the next election.

What Labour needs is a figure as capable of political teaching as Thatcher - as much as her messages may have been simplistic and often incoherent and as much as her policies caused immense long term social damage. Someone who can inspire political realignment and tell a compelling different story. I've not seen any evidence of any kind of a figure and until one turns up you're probably looking a getting in for a term every half-dozen elections or so.

I'm not sure that running towards the centre centre left or running hard left us inherently a more viable strategy. Starmer is not inspirational, neither are any of the potential replacements. We're choosing between flavours of loss.

I think Thatcher is pretty unique when it comes to Prime Ministers with having a focused vision of what the country should be and how to get there. I don't actually believe she cared about what was popular, she had a vision she was going to sell. These days especially politics is led by focus groups a lot of the time you don't tend to get political visionaries anymore.

There are whole governments from time to time that have a certain focus like postwar Labour or the Liberals at the turn of the last century but with regards to radically altering the country and defining many of the major political arguments for the next 50 years plus? There is no single indervidual like that other than her. To expect another indervidual to come along in the same vain is highly unlikely.

That's also probably one reason why she is so hated by certain groups, if the major things she did had been overturned by now she wouldn't get nearly as much hate. However because most of the major decisions are still the basis for the UK today as the main author of those decisions she is obviously going to be a magnet for hate.

[San Lumen]

https://abc7ny.com/10509366/?ex_cid=TA_ ... KVelfiUcbg

Officer fired after pepper spraying Black Army Lieutenant during Virginia traffic stop

[The New California Republic]

https://abc7ny.com/10509366/?ex_cid=TA_WABC_FB&utm_campaign=trueAnthem%3A+Trending+Content&utm_medium=trueAnthem&utm_source=facebook&fbclid=IwAR1a45fbK1-q2RbUB673VOdeNHAnVNZUUpJ-D8XSAy6vtrcTsKVelfiUcbg

Officer fired after pepper spraying Black Army Lieutenant during Virginia traffic stop

Has the state of Virginia now been relocated to the UK?

[Ifreann]

https://abc7ny.com/10509366/?ex_cid=TA_WABC_FB&utm_campaign=trueAnthem%3A+Trending+Content&utm_medium=trueAnthem&utm_source=facebook&fbclid=IwAR1a45fbK1-q2RbUB673VOdeNHAnVNZUUpJ-D8XSAy6vtrcTsKVelfiUcbg

Officer fired after pepper spraying Black Army Lieutenant during Virginia traffic stop

Has the state of Virginia now been relocated to the UK?

No, he's a lieutenant, not a lieutenant.

[An Alan Smithee Nation]

The changes in the nature of work have blurred Labour's appeal. The decline of manufacturing, the rise of service industries, Thatcher creating an underclass, the decline in union membership, the gig economy etc.. What does 'working class' mean nowadays? Is there any point being a party of the unions?

I would guess Labour's future is about making sure that the dividends from technology don't just go to a handful of billionaires, and people Matt Hancock has had a drink with, but are spread more equitably. So getting big chunks of cash from the likes of Google, Amazon, and Facebook. Wealth taxes rather than income taxes, fining companies when they behave like psychopaths. Protecting us little people from the power of big tech.

Personally I always see Harold Wilson at least as much the author of the modern UK as Thatcher.

[An Alan Smithee Nation]

Shirley Williams has died. Sad news. I'm sure Arch will have more to say about her.

[The Blaatschapen]

The traditional Labour base died with Thatcher when large sections of the working class were bought off with cheap sell offs of housing stock and Americanised dreams of opportunity.

New Labour was more New than Labour - the appeal was the aura of freshness and new ideas carefully coordinated to be acceptable to Thatcherite tabloids. How much was Corbynism really a groundswell of support for social democratic ideas and how much of it was more specifically a delayed backlash against the most austerity-focused politics in any major economy and the deeply inadequate campaigning of Theresa May?

Labour hasn't one a political conversation for a long while. It's very difficult to see a plausible coalition of demographics, constituency geography and so on which leads to Labour winning in anything other than a one-off disaster campaign for the Tories, to be flipped back at the next election.

What Labour needs is a figure as capable of political teaching as Thatcher - as much as her messages may have been simplistic and often incoherent and as much as her policies caused immense long term social damage. Someone who can inspire political realignment and tell a compelling different story. I've not seen any evidence of any kind of a figure and until one turns up you're probably looking a getting in for a term every half-dozen elections or so.

I'm not sure that running towards the centre centre left or running hard left us inherently a more viable strategy. Starmer is not inspirational, neither are any of the potential replacements. We're choosing between flavours of loss.

I think Thatcher is pretty unique when it comes to Prime Ministers with having a focused vision of what the country should be and how to get there. I don't actually believe she cared about what was popular, she had a vision she was going to sell. These days especially politics is led by focus groups a lot of the time you don't tend to get political visionaries anymore.

There are whole governments from time to time that have a certain focus like postwar Labour or the Liberals at the turn of the last century but with regards to radically altering the country and defining many of the major political arguments for the next 50 years plus? There is no single indervidual like that other than her. To expect another indervidual to come along in the same vain is highly unlikely.

That's also probably one reason why she is so hated by certain groups, if the major things she did had been overturned by now she wouldn't get nearly as much hate. However because most of the major decisions are still the basis for the UK today as the main author of those decisions she is obviously going to be a magnet for hate.

Given that magnets have two poles (usually) , it also means she is a magnet for love

[The Nihilistic view]

The changes in the nature of work have blurred Labour's appeal. The decline of manufacturing, the rise of service industries, Thatcher creating an underclass, the decline in union membership, the gig economy etc.. What does 'working class' mean nowadays? Is there any point being a party of the unions?

I would guess Labour's future is about making sure that the dividends from technology don't just go to a handful of billionaires, and people Matt Hancock has had a drink with, but are spread more equitably. So getting big chunks of cash from the likes of Google, Amazon, and Facebook. Wealth taxes rather than income taxes, fining companies when they behave like psychopaths. Protecting us little people from the power of big tech.

Personally I always see Harold Wilson at least as much the author of the modern UK as Thatcher.

Part of that is the union's fault. There used to be a lot more different unions so in whatever job you did youncould find a union you liked. My granny was a member of a non militant union that had no political affiliation but when all the teaching unions folded into one she left because unite didn't serve her desires for a union. She wasn't alone.

So if you don't support the labour party and never want to strike for example there isn't really a union for you anymore. Given the support of the Labour Party you can see how that can be a problem in some sectors.

If Unionism is ever to thrive again it needs diversity to satisfy different people, it's too much of a homogeneous blob at the moment.

[Ifreann]

Why would you want a union that never goes on strike?

[An Alan Smithee Nation]

The changes in the nature of work have blurred Labour's appeal. The decline of manufacturing, the rise of service industries, Thatcher creating an underclass, the decline in union membership, the gig economy etc.. What does 'working class' mean nowadays? Is there any point being a party of the unions?

I would guess Labour's future is about making sure that the dividends from technology don't just go to a handful of billionaires, and people Matt Hancock has had a drink with, but are spread more equitably. So getting big chunks of cash from the likes of Google, Amazon, and Facebook. Wealth taxes rather than income taxes, fining companies when they behave like psychopaths. Protecting us little people from the power of big tech.

Personally I always see Harold Wilson at least as much the author of the modern UK as Thatcher.

Part of thatbis the union's fault. There used to be a lot more different union's so in whatever job you did youncould find a union you liked. My granny was a member of a non militant union that had no political affiliation but when all the teaching union's folded into one she left because unite didn't serve her desires for a union. She wasn't alone.

So if you don't support the labour party and never want to strike for example there isn't really a union for you anymore. Given the support of the Labour Party you can see how that can be a problem in some sectors.

If Unionism is ever to thrive again it needs diversity to satisfy different people, it's too much of a homogeneous blob at the moment.

The future of work is likely to be a tiny group of extremely rich people, a very small group of salaried workers, self-employed people who sell their services to many companies and earn enough to support their lifestyles, and people who work multiple jobs and still don't earn enough to live on.

It is hard to how our political parties will fit into the shape of that.

[The Nihilistic view]

Why would you want a union that never goes on strike?

What's so groundbreaking about not wanting the education of the children in your class to suffer just because you want higher pay or something?

[The Blaatschapen]

Why would you want a union that never goes on strike?

What's so groundbreaking about not wanting the education of the children in your class to suffer just because you want higher pay or something?

The education suffers already from badly paid teachers.

[An Alan Smithee Nation]

Why would you want a union that never goes on strike?

What's so groundbreaking about not wanting the education of the children in your class to suffer just because you want higher pay or something?

So like Corbyn's nuclear policy?

[Ifreann]

Why would you want a union that never goes on strike?

What's so groundbreaking about not wanting the education of the children in your class to suffer just because you want higher pay or something?

Seems to me there's no way to get better conditions from your employer if you'll never engage in industrial action.

[The Nihilistic view]

What's so groundbreaking about not wanting the education of the children in your class to suffer just because you want higher pay or something?

Seems to me there's no way to get better conditions from your employer if you'll never engage in industrial action.

Would you rather those people were in some kind of union or like now aren't in one and don't like them?

It's easier for me if Unionism is in the gutter, you can choose to do something about the reasons people don't join or not. To be honest I'm not sure why I'm trying to give tips as to depending on the job why I wouldn't join a union. The big thing for me is political affiliation I'm not bothered about striking or not. But I supose I'm pretty safe in nobody actually listening to the possible problems and doing something to broaden the church.

The reactions here pretty much prove that, the seeming general incredulity and a lack of being able to comprehend why somebody wouldn't join a union as it currently stands is the first problem you actually have to deal with when it comes to reviving membership. But nobody seems willing to even think about it and as long as that is the case membership levels aren't being revived anytime soon.

[The Archregimancy]

Dame Shirley Williams - Labour cabinet member under Callaghan (where she played a lead role in the near-abolition of grammar schools), one of the Gang of Four founders of the SDP, and latterly a LibDem peer - has died at the age of 90. She was also the daughter of Vera Brittain, author of Testament of Youth.

Obituary: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-10258493

Her Wikipedia page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shirley_Williams

[The Nihilistic view]

Dame Shirley Williams - Labour cabinet member under Callaghan (where she played a lead role in the near-abolition of grammar schools), one of the Gang of Four founders of the SDP, and latterly a LibDem peer - has died at the age of 90. She was also the daughter of Vera Brittain, author of Testament of Youth.

Obituary: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-10258493

Her Wikipedia page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shirley_Williams

That's a shame, I always felt she had a respect for proper debate unlike the modern breed so I'll miss her for that.

[Ifreann]

Seems to me there's no way to get better conditions from your employer if you'll never engage in industrial action.

Would you rather those people were in some kind of union or like now aren't in one and don't like them?

I don't understand what would be the point of a union that doesn't do industrial action. Surely employers would just ignore that union. "Give us better pay or we will ask again in six months" is not going to get them better pay.

[The Nihilistic view]

Would you rather those people were in some kind of union or like now aren't in one and don't like them?

I don't understand what would be the point of a union that doesn't do industrial action. Surely employers would just ignore that union. "Give us better pay or we will ask again in six months" is not going to get them better pay.

Employment tribunals, supporting claims against companies breaking the law, all that sort of stuff, that's a massive part of what they do and none of it requires strike action. It's enforcing laws and contracts through court action.

I'm not sure why people think pay and striking is the only important reason for unions to exist.

[Ifreann]

I don't understand what would be the point of a union that doesn't do industrial action. Surely employers would just ignore that union. "Give us better pay or we will ask again in six months" is not going to get them better pay.

Employment tribunals, supporting claims against companies breaking the law, all that sort of stuff, that's a massive part of what they do and none of it requires strike action. It's enforcing laws and contracts through court action.

I'm not sure why people think pay and striking is the only important reason for unions to exist.

Pay is just an example, but striking and other kinds of industrial action are the reason unions exist, that is why they were created. One worker threatening to withhold their labour if conditions are not improved can simply be fired and replaced, many workers withholding their labour can shut the workplace down and prevent scabs from being brought in. We can break their haughty power, gain our freedom when we learn that the union makes us strong. But a union that only supports workers in taking legal cases against their employer in court or a tribunal can never secure better conditions that the bare minimum required by law. Can they?

[Philjia]

Latest poll from YouGov:
Con: 41%
Lab: 34%
Lib: 6%
Green: 6%
SNP: 6%
Reform: 3%

Conservatives have the advantage, Labour going nowhere fast without some kind of electoral pact, same as usual.

A marginally different but essentially the same result from Redfield and Winton.
Con: 43%
Lab: 36%
Lib: 7%
Green: 5%
SNP: 4%
Reform: 3%

[The Nihilistic view]

Employment tribunals, supporting claims against companies breaking the law, all that sort of stuff, that's a massive part of what they do and none of it requires strike action. It's enforcing laws and contracts through court action.

I'm not sure why people think pay and striking is the only important reason for unions to exist.

Pay is just an example, but striking and other kinds of industrial action are the reason unions exist, that is why they were created. One worker threatening to withhold their labour if conditions are not improved can simply be fired and replaced, many workers withholding their labour can shut the workplace down and prevent scabs from being brought in. We can break their haughty power, gain our freedom when we learn that the union makes us strong. But a union that only supports workers in taking legal cases against their employer in court or a tribunal can never secure better conditions that the bare minimum required by law. Can they?

All of that is the case when Labour laws don't really exist. But they do now, the amount of Labour related law in this country is huge. So the vast majority of the worker employer relationship over time has been transfered from that direct negotiating between employee and employer to the law courts. And consequently the legal support and finance a union could provide to use the court system is regardless of origin a feature of Unionism that should be attractive to everybody. So now you have to ask yourself why it is that something that is so obviously a benifit doesn't have almost universal uptake? I've made a few suggestions on that front and there are going to be others as well. The world has moved on whilst Len and his groupies haven't and that's really why Unionism needs to be modernised and options to fit all tastes need to be offered.

I don't think it's even that nessasery for obvious abuses these days either. Take zero hour ontracts, what were the two obvious abuses of that? It was exclusivity clauses and the worker not having the right to turn down a shift on short notice. Now you can't have exclusivity and the worker has to have I think it's a week notice or they can turn down a shift. In particular the right to turn down a shift at short notice allows you to bargin with your manager to get something else you want in return.

I actually had a zero hours contract at uni, it's really nice when trying to fit work around study especially if you have a decent manager. And I did often agree to do some shifts at short notice and trade that against a weekend I wanted off when I might usually work. Some of that was even before the law was changed. So would I have wanted a fixed contract forced on me? Absolutely not. There is a balance to strike and I think we have roughly found it on that topic for example. So when a union says ban zero hours contracts, I'm like no fuck off they work for me. And if there isn't an alternative union that recognises the flexibility I also get as a benifit for that contract as long as certain legal protections exist I’m just not going to join that union.

[Odreria]

Ah yes, Labour should emulate 2010 and 2015 instead. Such sensible moderate wisdom.

Honourable suicide, self destruction on the altar of a broad coalition and electoral reform, wasn't a necessity back then as it is now. The time for Labour has passed. It has lost it's monopoly over progressivism and has lost the surety of it's own internal unity. The complex internal bureaucracy that once served to hold Labour together now tears it apart as it completely obfuscates who within the party has legitimacy.

Yeah that's probably why Labour won those elections, and suddenly started losing once mean ol jeremy took over.