Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Brexit

Westminstenders: The end of tribalism

961 replies

RedToothBrush · 09/11/2019 00:55

There are signs that traditional party alignment might well have broken.

The Tories have split, labour are pretending they have not.

The pattern so far seems to be closely following the EU. This favours a Tory majority.

A long way to go.

OP posts:
Thread gallery
32
Mistigri · 10/11/2019 15:09

"I am trying to make a point about the importance of language"

I find denier a good word for people who refuse to believe established facts but I'd definitely be up for a wholesale shift to a better word. Climate fraudster maybe?

ArseDarkly · 10/11/2019 15:11

Corbyn was elected leader of the Labour party because he was the only candidate who offered a return to Labour's social democratic priciples. The membership rejected the continuation of Blairite centrist, light touch Thatcherism. And rightly so

Spot on

bellinisurge · 10/11/2019 15:12

And that is going to appeal to non- activists how?

GhostofFrankGrimes · 10/11/2019 15:13

is meaningless when it comes to MSM in the UK

Which is the problem of the electorate sucked into tabloid nonsense. I don't want politicians to spin everything to appease newspaper owners. Half the population believe the bullshit the other half think its cynical.

tobee · 10/11/2019 15:15

Corbyn was elected leader because things weren't perfect for everyone all the time under previous labour leadership.

ArseDarkly · 10/11/2019 15:17

You don't have to be an activist to appreciate Labour policies, i've seen many a leaver post saying that, if it wasn't for Brexit, they would be tempted to vote labour

GhostofFrankGrimes · 10/11/2019 15:17

And that is going to appeal to non- activists how?

Well it depends on whether you want a fairer society or not. You want common ground. Many leave voters complained of their communties being left behind. Lack of jobs, decent pay, austerity running their area down. They wrongly blamed the EU not the coalition and then the Tories. Only one party (in England at least) is offering to help that group of people.

tobee · 10/11/2019 15:19

Actually he was elected leader because Len. Which was why Ed won not David.

bellinisurge · 10/11/2019 15:21

"depends on whether you want a fairer society or not. "
Which sounds like if you aren't with us, you are against us. Divisive bollocks but do keep it up and see if your boy gets elected. If he does, I'll tip my hat to you and admit I was wrong. If he doesn't, well, you can comfort yourself with everyone else being wrong.

GhostofFrankGrimes · 10/11/2019 15:22

Actually he was elected leader because Len

Len had all the votes?

Which was why Ed won not David.

Ah yes, the dawn that never was.

tobee · 10/11/2019 15:25

Block voting?

GhostofFrankGrimes · 10/11/2019 15:26

Which sounds like if you aren't with us, you are against us

No its the reality of the Tories and ten years of austerity/hosilte environment or social democracy. That is what is on offer. I and millions other can't afford another Tory government.

We reached this point because New Labour wrongly thought everybody was middle class, forgot it working class roots. Then the Tories did what Tories were always going to do - trash Labour areas. Add Brexit and populism has crept in as people feel voiceless, powerless.

bellinisurge · 10/11/2019 15:28

I've been through this shit with Thatcher. Unlike Johnson, she was a competent foe with a superficially competent Cabinet. Getting rid of this lot should be piss easy. And yet it isn't. Because Corbyn.

DGRossetti · 10/11/2019 15:30

The Industrial Revolution didn’t happen in the 19th century?

Well it started, in England in the 1700s - so (a) not even a European phenomenon, let alone "global" and (b) anything you have to say about that period is eclipsed by the big bang of Krakatoa - to name but one. The whole globe was affected by a volcanic winter in the 1830s too. And before that, there seems to be conclusive evidence of some climatic catastrophe in the C6th with evidence from China to the Americas.

Which - once again - is irrelevant to the matter of "tackling" climate change. Which is much more about being more careful where we build houses, and how we manage water, and a lot less about thinking a few windmills and paper bags are going to save the species.

The bottom line - from a scientific perspective - is that life on earth will do just fine whatever. One of the less discussed trends of recent years has been the fact that wherever scientists stick their noses on earth, they have found life. Wherever. It's almost (as Prof. Brian Cox himself mused) as if life is an inevitable fact of chemistry, and an intrinsic part of planetary development.

Know how our ancestors cleared vast swathes of forest so quickly after the ice-age ? They just burned them. Thousands of square miles of thick forest going up in smoke to clear the land to plant some more cannabis and wheat (cannabis first, from archaeology). And to then continue the master plan to domesticate various Taurine and Bovine species in a quest to perfect the ultimate greenhouse gas pump - the modern cow (although I believe termites are still something to aspire too).

If you're going down the path of blaming mankind for climate change, then have the courage of your convictions, and admit it probably started way before the "evils of industrialisation" (and I note the subtext in that view ....) and begins in the idyllic pre-history when there were no British Isles, as we were physically part of Europe. Although I can just picture a small backward tribe somewhere on the South Downs praying to the God Fah-rah-gey for a tsunami of biblical proportions to cut us lose from the tyranny of beakerware.

Maybe we need to look at the Japanese (once again) for a steer in common sense. They haven't wasted the past few centuries in a fruitless debate about whether earthquakes are caused by underwater giant dinosaurs, or the will of God, or Mars conjoining with Ceres. They simply accepted them as a fact of life and in the main designed their lives - and buildings - around them.

Returning to the idiom "-denier" ... there is a quasi inquisitorial vibe to the construct. Much as "heretic" in days of yore.

You know, everybody loves to quite Godwins law (well, the first law, anyway). There really needs to be another one, for internet debates .... something along the lines of the more something is discussed, the more likely it is a Monty Python sketch needs to be referenced.

Blasphemer !!!!

GhostofFrankGrimes · 10/11/2019 15:33

Because Corbyn.

Nobody is forced to vote Tory. "I'm voting Tory because social democracy is worse than more austerity" doesn't really work if you've got a normal job and a mortgage to pay. How did Milliband fair in 2015? Oh sorry it was the wrong brother wasn't it. How convenient.

Peregrina · 10/11/2019 15:37

The term "Baby-Boomer" is an American mis-import.

Yes, indeed. My parents always talked of 'The Bulge' - i.e. 1945 - 49 (or thereabouts, when the troops came home. Hence in the early to mid fifties a lot of new primary schools being built to cater for them.

tobee · 10/11/2019 15:38

So block voting doesn't come into it?

GhostofFrankGrimes · 10/11/2019 15:42

So block voting doesn't come into it?

I haven't got a problem with Labour's union affiliation. I'm no fan of McCluskey. I think Frances O'Grady is a far better example of modern union leadership.

bellinisurge · 10/11/2019 15:44

But I'm not going to vote Tory @GhostofFrankGrimes . Why do you think I am?

tobee · 10/11/2019 15:45

It's not a question with having a problem with it, it's a question of why Corbyn and Ed were elected. As soon as Len went for Ed the writing was on the wall.

DGRossetti · 10/11/2019 15:45

Jesus, that's an embarrassing post. It was identified theoretically and in the lab. Since then we've done a fucking enormous planetary scale study on the subject!

And fuck all to tackle it.

tobee · 10/11/2019 15:49

It becomes a problem though when Unite etc vote for a leader who can't appeal to a broad electorate. If you're interested in getting the Tories out of power. If you're interested in having your policies standing a chance of getting through parliament.

It's great to have ideologies. It's great to have a good manifesto. But if the leader of your party can't get elected then you are stuck. If getting you're leader elected to become Prime Minister isn't your main aim then fair enough.

GhostofFrankGrimes · 10/11/2019 15:50

But I'm not going to vote Tory @GhostofFrankGrimes . Why do you think I am?

I don't think you are. I'm simply explaining the reality of the situation. I don't feel I have the luxury of spoiling my ballot. I'm sure people will celebrate Corbyn's resignation in the event of a Tory win but that'll just mean 14 uninterupted years of Tory rule. It took years for areas to recover from Thatcherism, many places haven't. Another Blairite isn't going to save Labour from whatever it supposedly needs saving from.

bellinisurge · 10/11/2019 15:51

Is Corbyn going to save Labour. I live in a Leave Labour area. It was a really safe seat. It isn't now.

GhostofFrankGrimes · 10/11/2019 15:55

tobee

I'm not sure why Labour having union support is bad when unions are built around the membership of ordinary workers. This is in stark contrast to millionaires that back the Tories. People should be able to see this and draw their own conclusions as to who has the countries interests at heart.

I believe Labours policies are sound. So do the Tories that's why they spend the majority of the time using the tired reds under the beds scaremongering. And ignoring their own abysmal record in office.

Swipe left for the next trending thread