Westminstenders: What hangs in the balance?

[RedToothBrush]

Yellow Hammer (and Black Swan if it exists) and other documents the government itself has produced are our truths and our evidence.

I look to Thomas Jefferson quotes in trying to defend liberal democracy.

His most famous of quotes is

Thomas Jefferson was the principal author of the Declaration of Independence. The Declaration states, “We hold these Truths to be self-evident, that all Men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness….”

Self evident truths. These are the bedrock of democracy.

There are many more quotes from Jefferson which talk about the shining beacon of truth and the threats to liberty from falsehoods and those who tell them.

He argued that when the power of the state is used to avoid scrutiny we should be worried and afraid. As a leader he should never be afraid of the truth, because the truth always exists and you can only merely hide it before it makes itself apparent anyway.

“The care of human life and happiness, and not their destruction, is the first and only object of good government.”

Today I feel the need to dust off old Jefferson for my own sanity and to remind myself of what matters. Jefferson helps me focus on dangers and how you fight back. It always comes back to exposure to the truth - how do you work to expose this (and the role of journalism in this)

Seek the truth. Talk the truth. Even if that means being self critical and humble in admitting your mistakes and errors.

It is not your identity as Leaver, Remainer, Tory, Labour, LDer, SNPer, woman, man, English, Northern Irish, Scottish, Welsh or European right now.

These identities are harming us, by making us look at the wrong thing rather than see the real danger facing us. They divide us whilst they conquer us.

What you should be focusing on NOW is your commitment to democracy in the face of someone in power actively and explicity saying the rule of law does not matter and the courts are wrong. That is advocating mob rule.

Johnson stood and said threats to MPs were humbug. And refused to moderate his language despite so many (mainly female) MPs saying the threats they received were extremely serious (remembering we've even had a prosecution for a plot to kill Rosie Cooper as well as other successful prosecutions for threats to MPs)

This is where we are at.

Focus on it.

No Deal Brexit and the future of liberal democracy in this country are indivisible and inseparable. They are entwined by the rule of law.

Brexit is NOT in of itself a threat to liberal democracy. It is HOW we leave that is.

I wish this was being said and emphasised concisely and cleanly.

I'm in exactly the same place MrPan - right down to resigning my Labour membership over Self ID.

If we had Cooper/Starmer as leader I'd feel very differently, but even without ill begrudgingly vote Labour to stop the Conservatives.

Ideally I'd vote Lib Dem (though again not without many reservations) but in my constituency it's been a pretty straight race between the two main parties in the last 3 GE's.

So MrPan when will people notice? Or won't they?

I am Labour, ex-member on the self -id issue AND brexit, and I would be forced to hold my nose for Corbyn as PM.

But what could a Corbyn PM actually do ? As this week has shown SCOTUK has placed limits on executive power outside parliament.

I'll admit I'm not up to speed on the thoughts of Comrade Corbyn, but no one has even suggested he's got plans to run a one-man government. Unlike Boris.

The more frenzied I hear the sentiment against Corbyn becoming, the more I think of Monty Pythons killer rabbit. Or Alanis Morissette turning out to be God ....

I wish there was an easily accessible on line calculator showing how much this has all cost including lawyers fees, new government departments, advertise campaign, fall in the pound, lost businesses and so on.

Still always look on the bright siide of life de dum.

Thanks - yes I had a noisy exchange with CLP notables, called a transphobe etc, discovered also the CLP is packed with fairly 'hard' brexiters, so had to go.
Voted Libs at Euro elections for tactics.

So I’m not wrong? Which posters wouldn’t accept Corbyn now? Very few, from what I can tell. That’s fine, as is my chucking in the occasional argument from the other point of view.

Sorry tobee. I wasn't telling you off. Probably should have added a

@CendrillonSings, being a fan girl for Johnson is pretty pointless here. You may find the Brexit Arms more to your taste.

oh sure, he couldn't do very much, but it's still counter-intuitive for me AND he will not have any time to improve anything whatsoever either. Starmer/Cooper have a better starting position in the country (probably).

FWIW I don't believe that CummJo hasn't thought of how to avoid a GNU replacing them.

Because it's not something they would think of.

If everybody here can be characterised as Corbynite lefty commie cultists who believe their beardy gods are faultless, why can't "we" characterise somebody as an orange-painted Trumpian wall-hugger? Goose and gander, etc?

With regard to considering Corbyn an acceptable replacement for BlowJob, well I have to confess that if those were the only options, I'd pick Corbyn. But in the sense that I'd rather have norovirus than Ebola.

I guess I'd better add myself to the pinko commie lefty cultist dossier.

You may find the Brexit Arms more to your taste.

Since I voted Remain, probably not. Thanks for the helpful suggestion, but until you buy out MN, I’ll continue posting within their guidelines wherever I like.

As has been said before this whole shambles has occurred because of a Perfect Storm situation: the migrant crisis, the collapse of banks/recession 2008, rise of al-Qaeda terrorism, Labour electing Corbyn as leader etc etc etc.

Recession? Bankers were innocent. As Alexie Sayle said last week, it was obvs caused by there being too many libraries in Wolverhampton.

in passing, talking of the power of the courts and government actions, it's worth refreshing our minds about the case from 1984 (now I feel officially old) where Mrs T. used Royal Prerogative to remove employment rights from GCHQ workers. Notice how the courts held there is:

"no reason why prerogative legislation should not be subject to review on ordinary principles of legality, rationality and procedural impropriety in the same way as any other executive action"

If anyone is looking to employ an IT specialist with recent legal experience @ me ...

Check out The Dude!

If everybody here can be characterised as Corbynite lefty commie cultists who believe their beardy gods are faultless, why can't "we" characterise somebody as an orange-painted Trumpian wall-hugger? Goose and gander, etc?

LOL

Anyone who actually read these threads would know that you can count the corbynites on the fingers of one hand. (That's not to say that I don't think Corbyn voters should be on here. I think the broad church aspect is what makes the discussion interesting).

Personally I can't stand Corbyn (useless) or his handlers (potentially dangerous) but compared to the all-out war being conducted on the rule of law and standards in public life by the current resident of no 10 and his sorry excuse for a cabinet, I think the risks involved in a temporary Corbyn-led minority government are rather manageable.

I think a GNU would be a better option. It would be hard for Tory MPs to be seen to be working with a Corbyn administration.

I think the risks involved in a temporary Corbyn-led minority government are rather manageable.

And once he’s been legitimized by becoming PM and is running for a full 5-year term to implement his manifesto? Because that’s the question that will arise in short order.

One of the things about a Corbyn led government is it is extremely unlikely to be Labour only.

Thus he would have to compromise with other parties.

This moderating force would stop some of the worst things I fear.

On the flip of that Johnson is liable to either have a majority or rely on the support of the DUP/ Brexit Party.

That's something likely to have to opposite effect to a moderating one.

That's more likely to result in excesses and abuses of power.

And once he’s been legitimized by becoming PM and is running for a full 5-year term to implement his manifesto?

You know how old he is right?

And there is already talk of a succession.

All other associated roles that depend on govt would be changing too - the committees will probably change in composition for eg.

I just want the grown ups back. They don't have to be perfect. Just not wild-eyed and abusive.

And once he’s been legitimized by becoming PM and is running for a full 5-year term to implement his manifesto?

Sorry, that's a bit unclear (probably me not thinking).

Not quite sure what path through the woods of the future you are treading there ?

I can't speak for anyone else on this thread, but my comments about a Corbyn premiership were directed at the possibility that he was heading some sort of Grand Alliance under the current parliamentary constitution.

However your comment suggests you are looking to a point in the future after the next General Election, when there is a possibility of a Corbyn led alliance/coalition/understanding ?

Either way, my point was that no man is an island, and a Corbyn PM of an alliance would have quite limited - if not desultory - powers.

That said, even in a majority Labour government, he'd be constrained by his cabinet, and ultimately parliament. Something the SCOTUK judgement has re-affirmed.

In hindsight, maybe Labour could have got a better response by also weighing in and disparaging the SCOTUK ruling noting how much it would stop Jeremy playing with his train set. Would have been harder for the Tories to have taken their stance and stand alongside Labour MPs criticising the judgement.

(Geordie accent) But what do I know ?

I have never voted Labour in my life, think Corbyn is a large reason we are in this mess.
I would prefer a very long list of other people to be in charge on a gnu other than him and particularly his back room people.
But it comes back to when your head is on fire you have to deal with that first and paint your nails afterwards.
Corbyn is now clear that he doesn't want no deal and will have a referendum.
This is so much better than the current government offering of circumventing the law for a hard Brexit.
Beggars cannot be choosers.

It would be quite ironic if Corbyn headed up a gnu and sent the extension request to the EU - probably the only party leader who actually wants some form of Brexit...

It sounds like the argument that Corbyn would be legitimised is that he wouldn't be so scary if he'd already been PM and the sky didn't fall in, leaving him clear to get a majority next time, when it will. Not that I want Corbyn as PM. At all.