Westministenders: Boris and God Knows what next. (I'm all out of ideas!)

[RedToothBrush]

Still a week until Stoke and Copeland. (Labour Hold/Con Gain unless something strange happens) QT is from Stoke next week.

A50 hits the Lords next week. Melania is being lined up to do something for the women. (God help us all).

Will UKIP survive? Will Nuttall survive? Will Labour survive? Will Trump survive? Will CNN survive? Will the Lords survive? Will Theresa May survive a class room of children?

All these questions and more

Lurking why do you think Russia was socialist rather than communist?

Because it called itself socialist ? As in "Union of Soviet Socialist Republics"

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_Union

Brexit is a way of distracting people from the other stuff going on which makes things worse.

YY to that.
So many things are going through wo anyone talking about it. The NHS for a start but a lot of other cuts etc...
All the whilst nothing is done for people from Stokes and anywhere else that is just as deprived

Rtb I totally agree with your post and throughly agree with getting into and down to so called no go areas, actually go and live there etc. It's one reasons why I back Frank field and go on about him all the time with his vote leave for the poor, because he has seen the day to day lives of very poor people, affected by adding loads more poor people to the mix from Eastern Europe and as he has said, where does your compassion lie, whose responsibility are the poor of the UK and whose the poor of Poland and Romania etc.

Also communism was considered to be the end goal which was to be reached via socialism.

I wouldn't get hung up on the semantics of the wording of what communist countries call themselves, it tends to be rooted in what mandate they want to claim for their rulers rather than their political ideology. I do not know the history in the case of Russia but China, North Korea and Yemen all style themselves as the People's Democratic Republic but it is certainly not democracy as we know it. In the case of China the rulers want to claim the mandate of being the rightful heirs and successors to Sun Yat Sen, regarded as the "Father of the Nation" in contrast to the actual democractic regime in Taiwan.

Their excuse for not actually delivering the democracy that was his vision is that he had considered that there might be a need for a period of education to ready the people for their responsibilities, though it seems unlikely he thought that would take over 100 years or that he would think modern day Hong Kong was not ready. That is part of the reason Xi jumped to declaring that Brexit proved that democracy, as in not done properly with a people who were not ready for their responsibilities, was the enemy of good stable government.

it tends to be rooted in what mandate they want to claim for their rulers rather than their political ideology

I think that's a universal truth ....

Its not just that the Europeans undercut salaries. The British workers often cannot compete as they don't work as hard and are not as skilled.

It's one reasons why I back Frank field and go on about him all the time with his vote leave for the poor

That he voted for laudable reasons doesn't alter the fact that he is totally deluded as to the outcome. He's one of many left wingers made such a naïve mistake.

From an article of his:

"If immigration is controlled and people begin to have faith in the system again, I also hope we might be open to taking more refugees from the world’s trouble spots. In other words a post-EU immigration regime can support our public services, expand our economy and also deliver humanitarian objectives; but because it will be under our control there won’t be unexpected and excessive pressures on our schools, hospitals and public infrastructure"

"I’m absolutely confident that if any Tory government was foolish to attack our fundamental rights they would fail in their ambitions to gain support in the north of England and in the cities."

He will be bitterly disillusioned.

Kaija: an opinion on fascism of the left which references Obamas politics.

mobile.wnd.com/2012/06/is-obama-a-socialist-or-a-fascist/#ygrBpykvozo8cTw5.03

But more interesting is this piece I will post next.

Apologies to the author, this fantastic post was saved from Quota but his name was cut off from my cut and paste and I don't have time to run a search as I am dashing around still.

"Hitler hated the left but not because of what they stood for but because first of all, he did not want the competition and second, he felt they had no balls. The late historian, George Watson, professor at the University of Cambridge wrote a great and very revealing book about this: The lost literature of socialism. 
He studied new data previously unavailable. Among it were the war-tables, diaries, note-books from the nazi’s themselves as well as interviews from nazi’s themselves. His conclusion was, and I quote: It is now clear beyond any reasonble dount, that Hitler and his associates were socialists and that other democratic socialists thought so too. The title of national socialism was not hypocritical.
In fact, the only reason why they are nowadays called right wing is because those days, socialism was fighting fo power almost anywhere after pure capitalism had gained a lot of criticism. Where socialism was considered left, capitalism is considered right. And left did not want to be associated with Hitler. At one point, Stalin came with the idea to start calling nazism, right-wing. He hoped that that way more people would turn away from the right, a tactic that other socialists and liberals followed. And so, racism and xenofobia suddenly were designated right wing. But in fact, no one at the right ever embraced these values. Right people do not want to be associated with nazism. Unfortunately, if you can repeat a lie more than enough, the lie become habit and the habit creates the perception of truth and in the end the perception becomes the truth. So today, racism is considered right. And liberals do not leave any chance to use that against anybody with different views. Sad. Really. Because that is exactly why a guy like Donald Trump gained control: because everyone who was not happy with the views on migration from the left, was insulted to be a racist and a xenophobe and a far right idiot. And then there was this guy named Trump and he acknowledged the problem, allbeit disproportionally. And as a result, he’ll now ban entire populations from entering the US.
We better stop asking ourselves whether Hitler was left or right and focus on what we, ourselves stand for. I guess no one ever wants nazism back. ANd all this nazism and fascism calling is nothing more but a struggle for power: because if I can convince people that you are a fascist, then perhaps these people will vote for me. None of these morons however think about the collateral damage that is being created and that people are divided into the self proclaimed anti-fascists who believe they have to fight the designated fascists. And before you know it, some Trump wins and the self proclaimed folks start rioting and vandalising stuff and beating the crap out of ‘the others’ because after all, they feel compelled to fight against fascism…. How ironic…"

Communism has generally been regarded as a sub-type of socialism, so it's perfectly reasonable to regard USSR as both socialist and communist without contradiction.

I assume that by "left-wing fascism" boredofbrexit means what others might call left-wing authoritarianism. Fascists were virulently anti-communist and communists virulently anti-fascist, but both were authoritarian.

Oh Gawd not Goldberg & Sowell again.

Basically trying to protect hard right politics from fascism by labelling fascism as left wing.

Fascism is nationalist socialism - the NatSocs in Germany were specifically anti-communist.

And there's not much socialism in fascism - based as it is on autocratic, elitist hierarchy with racial, xenophobic implications due to its intrinsically nationalistic character.

Xpost.

nazism started with

"poor us, look how we've been so badly treated by the rest of Europe"
combined with
"if it wasn't for the international Jewish Bolshevik conspiracy"
topped with
"Germans are so much better than the rest".

It's the same tune as Brexit.

Absolutely agree lurking

Ninon Barry Gardiner, Labour Remainer, was on Daily Politics today. He said something quite interesting in response to the Supreme Court ruling on minimum incomes for migrant spouses. In a post Brexit World there is the prospect that the Government will be able to create a non-discriminatory policy rather than favouring EU spouses as is currently the case.

lh true, compounded with the use of very similar propaganda

boredofbrexit That's classic right-wing revisionism of the "Hitler wasn't one of us" variety.

Stalin did not come up with idea to label Hitler as right-wing. That is patently ridiculous. Hitler was supported by the political right in his own country. The German right weren't operating under the guidance of Stalin.

The right-wing = capitalism is a purely post-war view. In the 19th century it was the Liberals who supported free trade, free markets, etc and the Tories who were in favour preserving the privileges of the aristocracy, etc.

And before you know it, some Trump wins and the self proclaimed folks start rioting and vandalising stuff and beating the crap out of ‘the others’ because after all, they feel compelled to fight against fascism

Nobody is rioting or beating the crap out of others. Classic right-wing authoritarian appeal to fear.

NDT - yep

BoredofBrexit

Is it too much to ask that you improve your sources? Paddy Briggs & a random online quote from someone who can't spell xenophobia & can't punctuate Nazis (plural needs no apostrophe), who was however, correct on one point:

Right people do not want to be associated with Nazism

No, exactly, hence all these contortions.

That's classic right-wing revisionism of the "Hitler wasn't one of us" variety

Exactly.

All the talk of Hitler just serves to remind me how "right" wing much of mainland Europe is.

I am having trouble getting my head around the notion that 52% of British people wanting to disassociate from the European Superstate is somehow more right wing. I do agree that the 14% UKIP vote does probably under-represent the right wing constituency, especially if the benefit bashing threads on MN are representative. However if there are lessons to be learned from the inter-war era they are surely that

1. it is not a good idea to go around punishing other States with reparations as the EU are doing to Greece
2. enriching your country at the expense of others as the Euro is effectively doing to the benefit of Germany seldom ends well
3. ignoring the collateral damage at the bottom of society in the name of fixing the economy doesn't work economically and is socially corrosive.

DD1 is currently studying interwar history

Priceless from David Davis here:

twitter.com/mikercameron/status/834302280153174017

Still, I guess all Brexiteers will be happy because the vote wasn't about immigration was it?

Ninon, I beg your pardon. Did I use a reference outside of those that you prefer?

I am aware that Nazis came to power in Dolchstosslegende against the communist jew. Hitler was not an extreme right-winger. His economic policies were broadly Keynesian, and to the left. He built a totalitarian state [completely left] which was highly authoritarian/fascistic [socially left]. Authoritarianism is not necessarily right wing

howabout or alternatively, and more than likely, they will inflict the same discriminatory policies on EU spouses as they do on non EU. Indeed they are already signalling that, as plenty of anxious SAHM /carer EU spouses will now point out.

Please can you tell me how refusing an extended tourist visa, let alone residency, even to educated Asian spouses with independent professional careers rooted in their home countries is indicative of anything but that Home Office policy is highly discriminatory, racist, and probably misogynistic (since the examples highlighted to me were all wives).