The Political Thread

[Michael Knight]

I think Corbyn is decent man of integrity. Which cant be said for many disciples of Blair that tried unsuccessfully to oust him in this contest.
Blair wasn't true 'Labour' by any of stretch of the definition. More Tory than the Tories on may issues. I'm not sure if Labour can get elected as sadly this country seems more in hoc to big business than ever.
I've got friends that were ardent supporters of Blair that now cant stand the man, and whilst they might not be fans of Corbyn they can see why the party has taken such a swing to the left to remove themselves from the last vestiges of New labour.
Personally I hope Corbyn continues to call for Blair's prosecution. It would go some way to restoring the image of this Country across the Globe. I'm truly saddened to see the continuing chaos Blair and his self proclaimed 'heir' Cameron have unleashed across the Middle East.

[Professor Bear]

On the other hand I'm not convinced that he is the man for it.

Nor was Owen Smith, but the PLP put him forward as their great white hope anyway, and said he'd be PM one day.  DISCUSS.

Despite all their protestations to the contrary, perceptions of electability are clearly not something they are concerned with, nor is serving their party, their constituents, or even the wider electorate, as evidenced by their basing their voting on welfare or military action on how it can allow them to inconvenience their leader.  At some point this became less about how bad Corbyn might be for Labour down the line and how bad the PLP demonstrably are for both Labour and the country right now.

[Frank]

politicians of all parties really do not seem to be getting their head around the divide between their views / actions and those of the electorate

People don't really have views. They flap from one plausible sounding idea to another.

Most people can't honestly report the way they voted in the last election, never mind face up to the truth regarding what they thought about Saddam Hussein or 'Europe'.

People get to forget their fuck ups and pretend they were always right in a way politicians can't. It's one of the reasons they hold us in such contempt.

[IndigoPrime]

The only thing Labour appears to be united on right now is red-lining anything that might result in a decent settlement with the EU. It's astonishing to see Corbyn and so-called moderates alike effectively in a pact with hardline Conservatives.

[The Legendary Shark]

I don't think they care enough about the people to hold us in contempt. They seem to regard us as a necessary evil at best and an impediment to their ambitions at worst.

You all know what kind of person seeks political power, what kind of person the establishment presents for election. One of the oldest jokes you know is, "how can you tell when a politician's lying?" Yet you keep on voting for these assholes anyway. Picking the one who seems the least assholey. Then you complain at the inevitable ensuing assholery.

If you vote, you can't complain.

[Hawkmumbler]

I genuinely doub't Corbyn is that kind of bloke, Sharky.

[IndigoPrime]

Labour right now certainly gives off the impression of caring about votes rather than the people it claims to represent. It's running scared of UKIP. Given that 65% of Labour voters went for Remain, it's astonishing to see Welsh Labour effectively vote against single market membership, and even prominent Remain campaigners now say freedom of movement is a red line (thereby wiping out any chance of anything other than a full hard Brexit). This is clearly to shore up votes in those seats that otherwise might be a bit UKIPpy, despite screwing over the country as a whole.

(I'm now resigned to leaving the EU. But it's utter madness to not at least use the EEA as a starting point, given that even WTO membership is not remotely guaranteed.)

[The Legendary Shark]

I genuinely doub't Corbyn is that kind of bloke, Sharky.

So, let's everything goes right for him and he becomes P.M. He's still going to expect the people to pay for his ideas (and his wages), and if people don't want to pay they'll be bullied into doing so, even have their property stolen. He'll want things done his way, and anyone who disagrees faces being fined or locked up.

I don't doubt that Corbyn is a nicer bloke than most of the rest but the system itself won't allow that niceness to trickle down. If one person says, "I'm not paying for that," he'll have no choice but to allow that person to be bullied and robbed. If he doesn't, it's a direct challenge to his power, and if there's one thing no MP or PM can abide, good, bad or indifferent, it's a challenge to their power.

All politicians seek power over others for one reason or another. Granted, some reasons might be more laudable than others but those reasons still require power, still require the obedience of the population, still require those who disagree to be bullied into compliance.

[Modern Panther]

Far better we do away with taxation and just privatize everything.  A world run by unelected billionaires who only have to worry about keeping their customers happy is a much better idea that democratically elected leaders.  If they don't run the world in the public interest we can just establish our own multinationals and overthrow their monopolies.

[The Legendary Shark]

Far better we do away with taxation and just privatize everything.  A world run by unelected billionaires who only have to worry about keeping their customers happy is a much better idea that democratically elected leaders.  If they don't run the world in the public interest we can just establish our own multinationals and overthrow their monopolies.

So, can I infer that you agree with what I posted and this is the only alternative you can envisage?

[Modern Panther]

No, Sharky, I was joking.

Look at the great lengths people and companies go to to avoid paying taxes, or to pay as little as possible.  If there is no reasonable means of compelling people to pay taxes, national services would collapse. In order for society to function, the rights of the people must be put before the property rights of a person.  Anarchist societies don't by build hospitals and motorways. 

If you don't vote, and encourage others not to vote, it doesn't limit the power of an unrepresentative government, or bring the power of that government into question.  It just makes it easier for an unrepresentative government to hold power, since they just have to appeal to a smaller base of support. 

[Tjm86]

On the other hand I'm not convinced that he is the man for it.

Nor was Owen Smith, but the PLP put him forward as their great white hope anyway, and said he'd be PM one day.  DISCUSS.

This for me was the biggest challenge.  He's our local MP to boot and I've not been blown away by him.  He's only been around for about a decade as a politician and is most likely only one because he was parachuted into Kim Howells insanely safe old seat when he retired.  To go to leading the opposition / future PM in that short a space of time?  Sorry but really not sold.  On the other hand Corbyn's performance to date leaves a lot to be desired at a time when the government really does need to be held to account.  Talk about Hobson's choice.  When you factor in the calibre of politicians full stop in any of the parties you really have to wonder what the hell is going on in this country.

[Modern Panther]

My biggest concern about Smith was the fact that he seemed to come from nowhere to suddenly be the guy the whole PLP was behind the whole time.  I can imagine he got a tap on the shoulder one day and was told "now is your time...you're the least offensive  and most marketable mildly left wing man for the job.".

[The Legendary Shark]

...the rights of the people must be put before the property rights of a person. 

This, for me, is the fundamental point of disagreement.

It is only a small step from "the people" holding more rights than one person to holding more rights than two people, or a hundred, or a minority. This is the argument of tyrants through the ages - "give me the power to crush the Communists/Jews/Gypsies/Gays/Palestinians/Blacks/Muslims/Immigrants (etc.), and I will save the rest of you."

The rights of the One must be sacrosanct and inviolable under and within the Common Law. If just one human being living within the Common Law can be crushed, then anyone can be crushed. As James T. Kirk said, "The needs of the one outweigh the needs of the many." The many is simply a collection of individuals, each with the same rights and responsibilities. The many, therefore, have only the same rights and responsibilities as the one.

[Tjm86]

My biggest concern about Smith was the fact that he seemed to come from nowhere to suddenly be the guy the whole PLP was behind the whole time. 

Not so sure it was the whole PLP but I know what you mean.