[Tainari88]

Oh Tainari, why can't you see? Corbyn is a radical and unrealistic uber-communist because he wants to nationalise the railways (like the socialist dictatorships of France, Spain and pre-1994 Britain), make universities free (much like the Stalinist countries of Germany, France, Scandinavia, and Argentina), and introduce rent controls (as occurs in Maoist Germany, France, Spain, and Ireland). This entirely unrealistic and unrealisable plan of socialist destitution was introduced in a costed manifesto in 2017, while the realist and fiscally prudent Tories sensibly provided a non-costed manifesto for their healthy plan of not taxing mega corporations, slashing security for the poorest, privatising as many public services as they can get their hands on, and generally maximising economic inequality.

I mean, just take railway nationalisation as an example of how unrealistic and silly Labour are. Sure, British railways are one of the most expensive and least efficient in Europe! Sure, the British railway traveller essentially pays twice for the railway, once through tickets and the second time through subsidies! Sure, the rail companies act as a quasi-monopoly, jointly and consistently raising their ticket prices above the rate of inflation! Sure, said companies barely invest any of their profits back into the railways, preferring to send everything to their shareholders! Sure, some private railway companies have been so magnificently incompetent that even the Conservative government has had to nationalise some parts of the network in the south-east (the UK's core economic area) because of the sheer damage those companies were doing to national productivity! Sure, the thousands of pounds that an annual rail ticket between England's biggest cities costs eats up a huge proportion of even a middle-class income! Sure, even quite a few (heretical) Tories now recognise that privatisation was a mistake! But why can't you see, Tainari, WHY CAN'T YOU SEE, that to nationalise the railways would be to introduce the grossest unfreedom seen since Stalin collectivised agriculture? Why can't you see, my dear Tainari, that to render a utility that massive numbers of the population rely on to work affordable will directly lead to the Gulag!?

That damned radical Corbyn! I mean, he even suggested putting the absolving of student debt under review (not promising to pay it off, not promising to absolve it, but simply placing it under review - such unadulterated radicalism!). It's not like student debt is a ticking time bomb, a bubble waiting to burst, because the Tories jacked up student fees to £9000 a year at the same time as the financial crisis made graduate jobs ever harder to come by. He'll drag us back to that dark time in Britain's history when it was a communist dystopia - 1945 to 1998, when universities were affordable to most and even free to some!

Remember, Labour believe in the magic money tree: to them, money comes from the air! Not like our wonderfully realist and fiscally prudent Conservative government, who've decided to hand out money by the shovel load in corporate tax cuts, upper income tax cuts, and prison development (along with nice big backhanders to their fundamentalist Protestant allies in Northern Ireland, who just love to contribute to the stability of that famously peaceful part of the world by backing the marches of the Orange Order through Catholic areas in acts of evident provocation)! After a decade of saying that Britain can't afford social security payments, disability benefits, libraries, a well-funded police force, well-funded local councils, or well-funded healthcare, this same beautifully prudent government has decided that Britain can well afford the multi-billion divorce bill to the EU and the annual multi-billion hit to the British economy that even the most optimistic Brexiteer knows will be inevitable in the short term!

I mean, Corbyn is just so radical! Not like those humble moderates currently in office. You know the ones I mean. The ones insisting on no-deal Brexit, the most radical and damaging form of Brexit, because they believe in shock-doctrine neo-liberalism, whereby they'll use the inevitable recession after leaving the EU to justify an even harsher form of austerity and economic inequality, one that result in the NHS being pawned off to the Americans and the introduction of a US-style healthcare system where a broken bone can bankrupt even quite stable middle-class households. The same form of Brexit which will permanently alienate Scotland and Northern Ireland, at best creating two Catalonias in the UK, at worst leading directly to the dissolution of the country altogether!

Oh, those saintly moderates! Oh, those supporters of all things moderate, like reintroducing the death penalty, chucking out the Human Rights Act, and doubting in/completely ignoring climate change and environmental protection! Silly Corbyn, silly socialists, wanting clean air, safe water, economically affordable renewable energy!

And he calls himself a socialist! How dare he?! He doesn't live in a bin, chewing on rinds of thrown-away pizza, the only true metric of socialism! He's not like those real men of the people Boris Johnson and Jacob Rees-Mogg, who definitely haven't spent their lives luxuriating in unearned privilege! Oh, why won't he listen to real socialists like Tony Blair, who made the Labour Party almost indistinguishable from the Tories!

I must say a most magnificent post. I can tell you love the Tories and they don't make you puke at all do they? Hee hee hee.

Ay Senor @Kirillov I have been schmoozing all day with a woman who is bringing STEM and coding and so on to Mexican children. My job will be to teach adults English and History.

I am going to have to leave the debate with Ms. Kaiser here for tomorrow because I got to deal with a little boy telling me he wants a late night snack. How have you been Kirillov?

[Tainari88]

I'd have hoped that it's not controversial to say that there is a trade-off, but at any rate the welfare state is a permanent feature which makes it qualitatively different to something like the Iraq war and other one-off expenditures. If 5% of the UK population claims $100 more per month than they are entitled to for a few years, it would cover what the Iraq war cost the UK. That also doesn't take into account that the middle class and consumption taxes pay for the lion's share of welfare and the left is often dishonest by giving the impression that it will be only the rich who will bear the burden of increased spending. The debate in the US seems to be particularly distorted in that respect.

The welfare state is a permanent feature in modern capitalist societies Kaiser, because the boom or bust aspects of capitalism has not gone away since the welfare state was implemented long ago. Capitalism doesn't provide full employment for even hard working people with low absentee rates at work. Working class people in the UK are not convinced that things are working in their favor. This is not controversial Kaiser. Everyone agrees to spend money on the lower classes? No, Kaiser, the Tories are usually dragged kicking and screaming into spending on the ones who need those services. Why? Because they don't use those services. They are fairly well off spouting rhetoric about how privatizing industries and investing in some project that British bankers find attractive is the way to grow a healthy economy. And they are wrong and stupid in the extreme. You keep thinking most of the UK is feeling safe, comfortable and everything is A-Ok. It is not. Otherwise all those working class folks who voted out of Brexit would have stuck with the upper middle class plan of stay in EU. They did not. So? What conclusion does one draw? That the plan the upper middle classes and above found as the solution to the 'woes' of the economy for the UK doesn't work. For them. The working class. They are not excited about the EU trade relationships. Why? Because they did not see the trickle down theory of bull that the Tories and others always peddle. This is the usual Tory line: "This will benefit all groups in the UK. Everyone will have a booming economy." No, it won't for some working class folk in the UK. And apparently there are enough of them to vote against remaining in the European Union, and they don't care the upper crust are upset about separation from the EU. Your jobs as Tories is to respect the democratic will of the voting blocks. Not pick and choose what you want that only benefits your group. Which is what the Tories do anyway and why they are going to lose elections.

Tribalism and anarchy are not synonyms for me, but anarchy encourages tribalism and women are on average more vulnerable than men in the absence of state authority. Just as with the above, this shouldn't be controversial.

You sound like a patronizing person who doesn't understand political categories. Aren't you a moderator? You should know political categories by heart instead of citing assumptions. That idea that women are vulnerable? Working class women are especially vulnerable with Tory policies that love gutting NHS budgets, and welfare and other programmes that many working class or single mothers rely on to survive. The state only is good if it is serving the vast majority of the working men and women in a nation. If it is serving again only the wealthy? It is an illegitimate state. It loses legitimacy to be there in an authoritarian way. It becomes the dictatorship of the wealthy and the snobs. Which is what Tories are in their very core. Snobs, and wealthy people who don't give a damn about anyone but themselves ruling to make sure they stay on top. I hate those people with a passion. The amount of suffering they cause by their retrograde thinking is horrific. Horror. That is what they are. If you don't care about other Britons and British citizens because they are not your group of snobby rich fools with failed policies in political life? You need TO GO!

I maintain that it is exceedingly stupid to prefer anarchy over a Tory government. Even taking into account the welfare cuts under Cameron, the UK has an expansive welfare state which makes your rhetoric above and in prior posts seem ridiculous. Where do you believe the money for a surgery or welfare for a single mother and her children would come from if we didn't have a state that forces people to pay taxes and provides the necessary services? Before we continue, you might want to look up UK expenditure under Tory and Labour governments in modern UK history where you will see that compared to overall spending the differences are quite small. All parties in the UK fundamentally agree that welfare is required for those who cannot help themselves or have temporarily fallen on hard times.

You continue to believe I said I am an anarchist. I am not. I backed Jeremy Corbyn in this thread. He is left. That is who I support. But Tories are worse than anarchists. The person who is stuck with Tory fallout crap political policies suffering high unemployment, worrying about not having enough hours at work, stuck with all the horrible decisions that @Kirillov pointed out are going to be in better shape politically with NO STATE AT ALL over a Tory state. Yes, they will. You might not think so? But hey, you don't care about those lower class voters. No. If you did you would not be all--Oh, dear I got to find a Tory that is working hard in making things happen for the lower classes. I guess we got an issue in finding competent Tories. Leave that party while you have a chance. THEY SUCK.

As for the Brexit vote, I'm getting the impression that you are not aware of which income brackets and social classes actually voted to leave the EU. Here is what it looks like:

If anything, it's the rich and professional classes that are enarmoured with the EU. The working classes have never liked it.

No, I know who voted for leaving the EU. The lower bracket people. Why did they do that? There are all kinds of theories. But mine is clear. The supposedly great Union has not been benefiting them at all. They don't see the results. They don't see higher wages, better conditions, more infrastructure, more opportunities. The upper class who did favor the EU with their trickle down economics have failed the lower classes in the UK AGAIN. They are living with immigrant communities because the immigrants are not moving to Tory neighborhoods. They are moving to ones who live in cheap rent areas of the EU or council houses. They are mainly educated badly because the upper crust British citizens don't care to give those parts of the school system decent investment either. So the working class British person says---What did the Toffs do this time? Open the doors to the UK wide open, but they are not living with the immigrants and the foreigners and competing for jobs with a bunch of people who are used to bad wages and no benefits. Where is the benefit for me and mine? No where. I say they should shove this EU crap up their rears and to hell with staying with the continent. A bunch of Polish plumbers, and Pakistanis opening little shops? And zero real jobs for my family? Out with the Toffs and their European Union.

The point is that people do not group themselves solely by their income, especially if they are not utterly destitute but overall quite well off which is the case for the vast majority of people in the western world today and a fundamental change to how people lived 100 years ago. If you look at models that predict voting behaviour, income is one of several explanatory variables, yet specifically in a UK context a wage earner with the same demographic characteristics, including the same good income, is more likely to vote Labour if he lives in the north of England and Tory in the south. From a conservative perspective the red wall in the north and the red heartlands in Wales, with plenty of people with social conservative values who also voted for Brexit, are an opening that could (and should in my opinion) be exploited.

You keep exploiting these pissed off working class British people who aren't seeing the results of these trickle down economics they never benefit from because the Tories don't give a damn about them? You shall have an uprising on your hands, a separation of Scotland from Westminster, a fleeing of Northern Ireland, and who knows if the Welsh kick your English butts out of their nation as well politically? Anything can happen with these rotten values the selfish Tory party has there. Conservative values like what? Being a bunch of imperialistic racists in their hearts, or xenophobes? Or selfish people bent on staying rich off the backs of the frustrations of their own citizens? That is the only thing you will accomplish with the core value of not wanting to deal with the reality that in order to make a better society serve the largest and most suffering GROUP out of the nation. Serve them well. And all this anxiety will be gone. But no.....stubbornly hold on to your upper hand positions and you will get defeated. It is bound to happen. Bring on the Corbyn. I hope that man cleans up some of the mess you nasty Tories have created.

Again, all this is a caricature and not really worth responding to.

Yes, I gave you a chance to find a decent Tory politician in that bunch of rotten fruit. But no? You brought out some losers. Can't do it. Yet cling to what? That sinking ship? Not worth dealing with denial in people. That is my thoughts on it.

[skinster]

[Tainari88]

8)

Yes, the Tories care about the poor and the destitute. Please....damn liars they are. They are taking payoffs for cutting services. They are exactly how Corbyn describes them. But they sit in their two forked tongue lying ways hoping they can stay in the power seat telling working class Brexiters that they can solve the problems of trickled down stupidity.

Ave maria @skinster, then they don't understand why I want to throw up when I listen to their LIES? It is incredible.

They should sing that song we use for bad politicians who don't want to get off the power seats....

Quitate tu pa ponerme yo....Get out so I can get on there....Lol. That is their mentality. But getting on to do what? That is the question my dear @skinster ...that is the question!


You got Kaiser talking about exploiting some working class voters for their party. She should be talking about how to serve the interests of the working class as a whole. But those Tories don't care about serving those people. Just staying in power and being snobs. You think I don't notice these snobs with patronizing tones in these fora? They are so easy to spot. Lol.



They better not even tell me to 'tone it down'. I am not British and that culture has nothing to do with me or my style. I am not interested in becoming Anglo. This forum PoFo is for international politics and I will comment on the conservative rot in every nation in the world. My style is not staid and plodding and devoid of emotion. I wasn't born in that culture of suppress your emotion because that is our scene. Well? A lot of world cultures don't agree. Lol.

Corbyn I liked. I heard his speech Skinster and I like his thoughts, his policies and his style. He is not Tony Blair. Lol. And his wife Laura Alvarez. I like her too. Heard her speak in Spanish in her home nation. Very interesting and intelligent woman. He has good taste in women Jeremy. His Spanish is lovely too. Good speaker in the Spanish language. Impressive intellect.

The Tories suck. I hope he makes them squirm in their smug, nasty ways. Lol.

[Patrickov]

8)

This guy is too tactless. A country's stakeholders do not necessarily be solely the benefactors. For example, why can't I donate to his party simply because I agree with his politics? Moreover, I have a feeling that Labour itself will suffer as much as the Tories from this scheme, if not more. Many of his party will probably revolt.

Yes, I gave you a chance to find a decent Tory politician in that bunch of rotten fruit. But no? You brought out some losers. Can't do it. Yet cling to what? That sinking ship? Not worth dealing with denial in people. That is my thoughts on it.

Frankly, as much as I hate them, being able to deceive enough voters to keep them in power is exactly why the Tories should not be seen as losers. IMHO you have quite some people to defeat.

[Tainari88]

This guy is too tactless. A country's stakeholders do not necessarily be solely the benefactors. For example, why can't I donate to his party simply because I agree with his politics? Moreover, I have a feeling that Labour itself will suffer as much as the Tories from this scheme, if not more. Many of his party will probably revolt.



Frankly, as much as I hate them, being able to deceive enough voters to keep them in power is exactly why the Tories should not be seen as losers. IMHO you have quite some people to defeat.

Labour was run by some Tories Light for a long time. Better to get rid of the Tories Light in that party faking like they are pro the working classes and the down to Earth people. They are none of that those fake liberal or leftists who are fakers.

Being able to deceive people is a good thing? What kinds of politics do you want @@Patrickov? Frankly, deceiving and lying to people is not a good political tactic in the long run, it erodes trust, creates resentment and it makes your party harder to survive politically over time. The only ones who think deceiving others well is the best path in politics? Are corrupt freaks who should never be allowed to rule in any political party. They are the ones who create problems that make politics a dirty business indeed.

[Patrickov]

Being able to deceive people is a good thing? What kinds of politics do you want @@Patrickov? Frankly, deceiving and lying to people is not a good political tactic in the long run, it erodes trust, creates resentment and it makes your party harder to survive politically over time. The only ones who think deceiving others well is the best path in politics? Are corrupt freaks who should never be allowed to rule in any political party. They are the ones who create problems that make politics a dirty business indeed.

NO. Why would you think I advocate deceit when just 2 or 3 hours ago I went very far in denouncing somebody else as such?

What I mean is that there are people out there who (collectively) hold enough power, but are easily deceived. From your standpoint, it is easy to see Tory supporters are this kind of people. What you need to do is to defeat them, so that they no longer want to, or in extreme cases, cannot cast their votes, and harm the good parts of the society as it is.

[Tainari88]

NO. Why would you think I advocate deceit when just 2 or 3 hours ago I went very far in denouncing somebody else as such?

What I mean is that there are people out there who (collectively) hold enough power, but are easily deceived. From your standpoint, it is easy to see Tory supporters are this kind of people. What you need to do is to defeat them, so that they no longer want to, or in extreme cases, cannot cast their votes, and harm the good parts of the society as it is.

They are easily deceived because of various reasons. My theory on that is that they don't want pie in the sky theories that never deal with bread and butter political issues like job stimulus. I have friends on this board who are UK citizens and the universal problem is that the jobs are scarce, are hard to come by or get, and pay inadequate wages. Some of these friends of mine have advanced degrees from UK universities and some experience in their field and still are in the unemployment line for years. That is a big problem. Why so many obstacles with employment? Because the Tories think it is better for the public to be left with minimal spending and despair than to start whipping the very wealthy into some harsh taxation. How much money do these rich people need to live? Decently? There should be a cap. The rest is for being able to raise wages for everyone and get some job stability for a lot of people and subsidize some education including vocational training for those that are experiencing a difficulty in finding appropriate work. But no.....they continue screaming about their damn pocketbooks. How much money is decent money? I say if you can pay rent or mortgage for a family of four and have a three bedroom two bath home with a garden and a place to park your family car? You got enough to pay comfortably your water, light and so on bills? You are not in debt and can save about 15 to 25% of your income in savings for emergencies and the future? You don't need the rest. Invest in the ones without. Period. If you can't do that? You are being an a-hole about society. Be realistic. You want to dominate millions of dollars because of what? POWER. GREED. EGO. It will lead you astray. You aren't in this world to be self centered. It is not about you and your grand ego. It is about service.

Politics are not about that? Then get the hell out of the way and let people who do have decency run the nation. Not you.

Many people vote for things they don't even understand well because they lack political and basic education. That is the truth of it. Do you know how many students I have had from many places in my classroom that have told me....to my face. "Teacher, I don't know what capitalism is, socialism is, anarchism, or liberalism. I just know my mother is a Republican and my father is a Libertarian but they don't know what it means either they just vote because their neighbor told them it was a good thing." We got a series of extremely bad things happening.

We even have moderators who don't know what anarchists stand for and think it is about some tribal primitive stuff that women have to run to men for protection. Because law and order is critical. It is only critical when you have decent and sound values being practiced in state institutions. If it is wielded by a bunch of rich snobs and people who are only in politics to oppress most citizens in their nation? They are the reason why the anarchists believe power is corrupting. Because they prove the anarchists right about the corrupting of power. The Tories prove the anarchists right. All the damn time.

[Kaiserschmarrn]

The welfare state is a permanent feature in modern capitalist societies Kaiser, because the boom or bust aspects of capitalism has not gone away since the welfare state was implemented long ago.

The vast majority of welfare spending has nothing to do with economic recessions and we'd need it even if there were none.

Your jobs as Tories is to respect the democratic will of the voting blocks. Not pick and choose what you want that only benefits your group. Which is what the Tories do anyway and why they are going to lose elections.

With the exception of the Brexit party, the Tories are the party which is most in line with the democratic will expressed in the referendum. Those MPs who wish to obstruct or downright ignore the referendum result come mainly from parties further to the left.

You sound like a patronizing person who doesn't understand political categories. Aren't you a moderator? You should know political categories by heart instead of citing assumptions.

Maybe you can educate me then. If we have no state to force people to pay their taxes, where does the money for welfare come from?

You continue to believe I said I am an anarchist.

Anarchy might not be your ideal, but you prefer it over a Tory government, which means you prefer no state compared to one with the Tories in power which dedicates most of its 40% of GDP spending on welfare, pensions, healthcare or education, around GBP500 billion in total. How do you propose these services would be provided under your preferred anarchic system?

No, I know who voted for leaving the EU. The lower bracket people. Why did they do that? There are all kinds of theories. But mine is clear. The supposedly great Union has not been benefiting them at all. They don't see the results. They don't see higher wages, better conditions, more infrastructure, more opportunities.

The main issue was that decisions about the UK be made in the UK and not in Brussels.

You keep exploiting these pissed off working class British people who aren't seeing the results of these trickle down economics they never benefit from because the Tories don't give a damn about them?

I'm not so paternalistic to assume that working class people can't make their own minds up and must be "exploited" if they don't vote as I want them to vote. What I'm pointing out to you is that in reality your assumptions about them aren't correct. People don't define themselves entirely by their income and their preferences in the value domain are generally more aligned with conservatives.

[Tainari88]

Disillusion with the Labour party and the Tories: Part of the reason for the rise of Corbynism in the UK:

Why are the Corbynites all into this man in the UK? Lol. Too many horror Tories that made it happen. Lol.

[Kaiserschmarrn]

Why are the Corbynites all into this man in the UK?

One of the funniest things about Corbyn mania is seeing self-styled progressive middle class radicals rallying around an old white man as their saviour.

And of course Corbyn doesn't lack posher than posh support either. In some ways Labour is reverting back to old form on upper class Stalin apologists and the like.

Will champagne socialists soon be all Labour has left?

Will these classplaining champagne socialists soon be all Labour has left? Charlotte Edwardes reports

There’s a story doing the rounds in Labour HQ about Andrew Murray, the avowed Communist who defected to Jeremy Corbyn’s party in 2016. Murray, now Chief of Staff to Unite’s Len McCluskey, is a ‘quiet, unassuming, reserved’ man with grey hair and sober suits; ‘unremarkable,’ say colleagues, but for his detailed knowledge of union movements and his ‘unerring good manners’.

Murray, the tale goes, was taken to a football match at The Hawthorns, the stadium of West Bromwich FC. Striding through the redbrick post-war terraces in the Midlands drizzle, past plastic windows and wheelie bin-strewn streets, Murray appeared to his companions ‘transfixed’. ‘For him, it was a fantasy of a blue-collar Britain,’ says one. ‘He was seeing first-hand a proper working class, and he totally adored it.’

Murray, as everyone in Labour knows, is not just a trade unionist, he is an aristocrat. His mother is the Hon Barbara Hope, and through her he is a descendant of the Earls of Stanhope and Beauchamp. The family is related to the Earl of St Germans and Earl Manvers and thick with Old Etonians and Oxford graduates. His father is Peter Drummond-Murray of Mastrick, whose Jacobite ancestors include the 4th Viscount Strathallan.

Is it extraordinary that such blue blood should flow through the veins of Corbyn’s hard left? Actually no. Under Corbyn, the party ‘is posher than at any time in the 20 years I’ve worked there,’ says one source.

What’s interesting is how strong the influence of the upper-class ‘Leninist’ left is on the intellectual direction of Corbyn’s ­Labour (indeed his advisers ran rings round Theresa May’s rather second-rate and parochial thinkers, who grossly underestimated Labour’s political stealth in the snap election of 2017). But they are also changing the party beyond all recognition. And, in doing that, the likes of Murray and his grand colleagues are crucial.

Perhaps most critical of all their initiatives is the watershed vote at Labour’s Annual Conference – in Liverpool at the end of September – that may help the radical left to consolidate and formalise its grip on the party for good. The idea, over which there has been much frothing, is for a rule change that will allow local party members (who are mostly Corbynite) to elect Labour’s local government leaders, rather than just local councillors doing so, as is the current practice (and local councillors are largely not Corbynites). Coupled with that is an attempt to reduce the role of Labour MPs in nominating leaders of the party while strengthening the part played by trade unionists and members. Under the proposed changes, left-wing candidates will have less difficulty making it on to the ballot paper, and thus the membership – overwhelmingly hard-left – will continue the Corbyn project even ­after he’s gone. ‘Labour would become a hard-left fiefdom, a socialist ­dynasty,’ explains a political commentator. The red toffs will be central to that dynasty – just as Corbyn is.

‘Jelly’, as the young Corbyn was nicknamed, had a ‘thoroughly upper-middle-class, scruffy, country upbringing’ according to his biographer Rosa Prince. The family home was Yew Tree Manor, a pretty red-brick Georgian property, once part of the Duke of Sutherland’s Lilleshall estate on the Hereford/Shropshire borders. From here he went down the road every day to Castle House Preparatory School. While two divorces have seen him downsize from elegant Islington residences to the wisteria-fronted terrace he lives in today, Corbyn has many genteel pursuits – not least ­gardening and jam-making.

He is described as ‘absolutely charming’ by neighbours and opponents alike. Caroline Russell, a Green Party councillor in Corbyn’s ward once told me: ‘You can be privileged and have this background and still be interested in standing up for the common good.’

Indeed, Corbyn is privileged enough for former interim leader Harriet Harman – much mocked for her St Paul’s Girls’ School accent – to joke that she was ‘not possibly old enough or posh enough to be the frontrunner of this leadership election’, before handing him the baton of power.

Then again, far-left politics and the British aristocracy have long been intertwined. Baroness Passfield was among the founders of LSE, the Fabian Society and the New Statesman. Anthony Wedgwood Benn threw off his House of Lords ermine and the title Viscount Stansgate 22 minutes after the Peerage Act of 1963, allowing him to do so, was passed on 31 July. (Three weeks later, he was re-elected to the Bristol South East seat he had held before succeeding to his title.) And the first Earl ][of Durham was known – and reviled – as ‘Radical Jack’ Lambton.

Tam Dalyell, the Scottish Labour MP, never used the title he inherited either at Eton or in the Commons, but was influenced by left-wing economists while studying mathematics at Cambridge and railed hard against ‘imperialism’ and unemployment in Scotland. Frank Pakenham, 7th Earl of Longford, was a pioneering social reformer and campaigner right up to his death in 2001. More radical but no less privileged were the ‘Cambridge Five’, the privately educated Marxist-Leninists who spied for the Soviet Union from the Thirties until the early Fifties.

‘The harder the politics, the posher the devotees,’ says a former Labour adviser. ‘The real poshos are never mainstream Labour: they are communists and Trotskyists. Mainstream Labour’ – with all its dull, ordinary respectability – he says, ‘is a bit common’.

Nowhere is this truer than in the leader’s ­office, described by some in the party as run on Leninist lines of democratic centralism. ‘Their view of opposition is that it has to be crushed like a beetle,’ comments one. This feeling is enforced by the physical separation of the Thames-side suite of Corbyn’s rooms, reached from the House of Commons via an underpass, escalators, a staircase, double doors and a locked bridge.

As well as Murray – who was seconded to Corbyn’s side during the 2017 election – Labour’s top team includes Seumas Milne, the former Guardian columnist, now Director of Strategy and Communications, and James Schneider, Head of Strategic Communications. Both were educated at Winchester and Oxford (Milne on scholarships).

[...]

[skinster]

^ lol that article. Didn't read it all because of the aforementioned lol, but does it mention the 500K+ Labour membership that makes Labour under Corbyn the largest party in Europe? #AskingForALotOfFrands

They better not even tell me to 'tone it down'.

Te quiero.

[Sivad]

One of the funniest things about Corbyn mania is seeing self-styled progressive middle class radicals rallying around an old white man as their saviour.

That's the Fabian ideal, they want an anti-democratic elitist "socialism"

But the general idea is that each man should have power according to his knowledge and capacity. None should be without some share, but the power that he has should be limited to his knowledge, experience and capacity; and only those should rule the nation who have won their spurs in good administration of national affairs. In this way, we should restore to the State something of the knowledge that it wants, and we should take away from the State the danger of allowing a mass of ignorant electors - who are really fighting to elect a man who will look after their mines, their drains, their local interests, matters they understand - to upset international arrangements, and possibly plunge us into war - or worse, into dishonour. Those are the general principles which might be worked out, and might be applied to modern days. And the key-note is that of my fairy tale: “From every man according to his capacity; to every man according to his needs.”

A democratic Socialism, controlled by majority votes, guided by numbers, can never succeed; a truly *aristocratic Socialism*, controlled by duty, guided by wisdom, is the next step upwards in civilization.

- Annie Besant, leading speaker for both the Fabian Society and the Marxist Social Democratic Federation (SDF)

[skinster]

[Sivad]

So Corbyn's agenda is to remain in an anti-democratic neoliberal union and to also impose regressive taxes on the working class and feed his country to the climate technocracy? How very aristocratic of him

[Kaiserschmarrn]

^ lol that article. Didn't read it all because of the aforementioned lol, but does it mention the 500K+ Labour membership that makes Labour under Corbyn the largest party in Europe? #AskingForALotOfFrands

He certainly appeals to the middle class and certain privileged Oxbridge types. That he's chosen the latter to head his communications team might also go some way in explaining why the Labour party membership is more middle class than ever.

[SolarCross]

The best way to keep corbyn out of number 10 is set for the PM job a minimum academic qualification of at least 2 A-levels at grade D or more. Poor old privately educated corbyn only managed a low-grade moron level of grade E and E.

It is not that unreasonable a requirement. Even a lowly data entry clerk would be expected to have better than Es. One would hope PM of the UK might have to rise to a higher standard.

[Rich]

The best way to keep corbyn out of number 10

My advice for a happy life is not to get worked up (not that I'm suggesting you're getting worked up) trying to find solutions to none problems. Antetrump I would have said Corbyn is never going to get to Number 10.

Posttrump: Never say never.

However in the tiny chance that Corbyn does becomes PM, the entertainment value will be enormous. Also a country that elects Corbyn is no longer worth fighting for.

[SolarCross]

My advice for a happy life is not to get worked up (not that I'm suggesting you're getting worked up) trying to find solutions to noe problems. Antetrump I would have said Corbyn is never going to get to Number 10.

Posttrump: Never say never.

However in the tiny chance that Corbyn does becomes PM, the entertainment value will be enormous. Also a country that elects Corbyn is no longer worth fighting for.

Sure though i think his best chance was back in 2016 and he flubbed it. He has no chance against Boris and he is way too old to wait for Boris to move on to something else.

Commissar Corbyn is a relic of a bygone age, he is the last wheeze of zombie marxism before it disappears into the dustbin of history. Come on Corbyn give us one last scare before you slide back into the carnal pits of history. Have at it!

[skinster]

Lol at the ongoing whining from people who aren't part of the largest European political party there is today.