POLITICS CORNER

[Stanley]

I think that saying the unions are outmoded is going a bit too far. Terms of employment are far worse today than when I was working.
My attitude is quite simple. Corbyn was elected in a democratic process and his detractors, when they oppose him, are in fact in conflict with the membership who selected and elected them. End of story. The bottom line is that both Tories and right wing Labour are frightened of core Socialist principles and even more disturbed by someone who doesn't dissemble, doesn't lie and simply tries to get on with the job he was given. The sooner this impasse ends the better!
Give Farage his due. He knew when to get out..... his job was done.

[Bruff]

Yes. This country has the most restrictive industrial relations laws in any advanced democracy. By quite a long way. And the ‘Trade Unions Bill’ winding its way through Parliament aims to make them even more restrictive. Makes you proud doesn’t it? Having industrial relations laws more usually associated with South American juntas? Proves one of the few truisms in life: the defining British (English really) characteristic is hypocrisy. Just as we spout our democratic credentials and then line up to crawl to an unelected monarch or stick our clerics in the legislature, so we spout our democratic credentials and then line up to deny or severely restrict the right to workplace organisation, collective bargaining, free assembly, the withdrawal of labour and the like.

Don’t usually listen to 5Live in the morning, but there was a really funny exchange/debate between a maths teacher and then someone from what I think was the ‘campaign for real education’, or something. The backdrop is the teacher strike today. It was hilarious hearing the teacher try to get the campaigner to substantiate her arguments though the reference to evidence and the like, much as the teacher would try and get the same from an average pupil. You would think wouldn’t you that someone from a campaign for education would have the common curtesy to at least try and make a reasoned argument rather than sweeping generalisations? But then again, the last thing such types want is the encouraging of thinking, or the use of evidence. We have after all ‘had enough of experts’, as a former Education Secretary was at pains to point out the other week.

Still, this issue of underfunding in education that has prompted the industrial action will soon blow over. Once we’re out of the EU then everyone will get the schools places of their choice and class sizes will plummet. We know this as this is why a lot of people voted to leave the EU: pressure on schools places. It’s like the NHS: in time we’ll all get a GP appointment when we want at a time of our convenience. We know this because this is why a lot of people voted to leave the EU; they couldn’t get a Drs appointment. And of course we’ll all be able to afford a house because again, folk voted to leave the EU because of this. Experts, or others who might think a little about matters, would perhaps argue things are a little more complicated than this but their opinion counts for little these days. Exactly as it should be I suppose………

Richard Broughton

[Whyperion]

Doesn't Germany have the things like workers councils representation within the management of many of the companies still ? Its either a way of shutting up dissention , or in sharing knowledge on the company's aims and prospects can ensure a fairer split of involvment and reward between capital and labour?

[plaques]

Once we’re out of the EU then everyone will get the schools places of their choice and class sizes will plummet.

The above quote does not imply that Bruff thinks this a proper course of action but something that is implied by the 'right' wing thinkers.
Its a well known fact if you want to curtail demand, put the price up. Sugar and alcohol are recent examples. Once we get people paying for the privilege of getting an education or medical treatment there will be ample capacity to supply everyone. Providing you can afford it.

[Stanley]

Richard, I would love to sit and talk with you because I am sure I could refine my thinking about elements of our governance and society which have puzzled me for years. I know I sound like a fan club but I love your posts.... I have an idea P would enjoy it as well!
Spot on both of you. I have spent years watching the battle between 'Right' and 'Left' in all its manifestations and still haven't fathomed it. It all started for me many years ago when I first realised that the basis of all wealth was added value created by the workers and yet they were attacked at every opportunity, the most severe manifestations being when the 'Right' held the power. I'm not going to bang on with examples, we all know them. However, just one springs immediately to mind, the visceral hatred of 'Communism' in the 'free' world. To my mind this was basically confusion between the laudable and logical views of the early thinkers and the perverted use that these were put to by successive governments operating an extreme command economy mode. I know naked repression when I see it. However, and this was the bit that puzzled me when I was young, as soon as we needed help in WW2 Stalin the despot became 'Uncle Joe' and though we never admitted it, it was the Russian sacrifices that broke the German aggression, you've only got to look at the casualty figures to realise the price that was paid. As soon as the war was over the attitude changed to hatred of the 'creeping tide of Communism' (Remember the 19th century fear of 'The Russian Bear' and the threat to India) and look where that got us!
I suspect that this is still the basis of the still visceral hatred of the 'Right' for the 'Left' that we are seeing now. It is blindingly obvious that due to incredible mismanagement we are in for a rocky ride, just the time when we need understanding, cooperation and joint commitment to coping with the consequences of Cameron's Catastrophe. This is why I support Corbyn, not because I see him as a Messiah but because he is trying (however ineptly) to reverse the headlong rush back to the 19th century by adherence to a broken political system. Incidentally, it may be that he is doing some good already, it looks increasingly possible that the Two Party system is broken beyond repair and we are going to have to build a new scheme of governance.
Meanwhile, today is Chilcot Day. I'm not expecting heads to roll, the 'establishment' will as usual look after its own but we nay get confirmation that the whole structure of decision making that led us into the ill-fated coalition in the aggression against Saddam and Iraq was hopelessly flawed. Never again the use of the Royal Prerogative to plunge us into one of the biggest foreign policy mistakes ever. I am still convinced that the genesis of this tragic mistake was quite simple, the fact that the West was absolutely pissed off by the way Saddam had out-manoeuvred the combined might of the diplomatic efforts to control him. It says something that a common view in Iraq is that life was better under Saddam than it is now and the current death roll gives credence to this view. I said years ago that the big mistakes were made by us in the 19th and 20th centuries and instead of spending trillions on armed might we would do better to acknowledge past mistakes and pump aid into the countries that needed it.
But that's water under the bridge. Chilcot will give an opportunity to change our systems and perhaps avoid a similar debacle in future. Unfortunately, on past evidence I am not optimistic.

[Tizer]

Stanley, it sounds like you and Plaques should meet up with Richard on his next visit and hold a `Barlick Summit'. The rest of us would look forward to hearing the results of your deliberations!

You say you're puzzled by the way that relations went between the West and Russia but wasn't it simply that we hung together against a common foe but once that foe was defeated we squabbled over the pickings? Planning to divide up between the allies and then finding it wasn't quite that simple. Berlin Wall and all that. The age old story of being allies by necessity but enemies by choice?

[Bruff]

We are alone in the whole of Europe in not having a far-left party of any significance. Let’s be clear: I am not of the far-left. But far-left parties hold elected office in the rest of Europe, are elected as MEPs, spoken to as a part of coalition discussions (they are the gauche de la gauche in French politics, the ‘left of the left’). Here, the far-left is the bogeyman, the ‘red under the bed’ barely granted any legitimacy. In contrast to the far-right. We are not as spooked by the BNP or by the wilder fringes of UKIP nor are we perhaps encouraged to be as spooked. Certain newspapers devote acres of space to assorted Trots, Commies and Marxists; very little if any is devoted to the likes of the BNP/Britain First. The newspapers and wider media have been very clever in equating far-left politics with anti-Britishness; loony behaviour; threats to social cohesion; everything really that we ‘hold dear’. All of this can be if one so chooses, equated with the far-right. But it never really is. That a former King was rather fond of Hitler is regarded as a mild eccentricity, nothing of significance; that a former Oppositions leader’s father was a Marxist is proof of some latent future treachery (apologies for evoking Godwin’s Law there; I realise that means I’ve lost the argument…..).

Richard Broughton

[Whyperion]

"basis of all wealth was added value created by the workers
Wierd, I was sort of thinking of this last night as to where the taxable GDP to fund essential services (and their pensioners),would come from, and would there be enough to fund war-borrowings.

Chilcott- manages to come to much the same broad reported conclusions as most sane people in Britain had years ago ! ( I have not seen mention of Chilcot's view on Royal Perogative.

[Stanley]

I breathed a sigh of relief yesterday when I realised that Sir John Chilcot has done a quiet, thorough and devastating job. He should get a seat in the Lords for this. Well done Godron for starting the process... It would appear that those of us who opposed the incursion and our reasons for doing so were correct.
The sour note was Blair acting out his role as a penitent. The man is a chameleon. The question now is not who do we prosecute but what do we do about the deep fault lines in politics, 'intelligence' and the procurement process that sent the lads out with inadequate kit. Thatcher got away with it in the Falklands but Blair's bid for legacy failed miserably. One more nail in the coffin of our governance systems. How do our leaders ever regain trust?

[Tizer]

That a former King was rather fond of Hitler is regarded as a mild eccentricity, nothing of significance; that a former Oppositions leader’s father was a Marxist is proof of some latent future treachery (apologies for evoking Godwin’s Law there; I realise that means I’ve lost the argument…..).

The trouble with reading OG posts is that I have to keep looking in the dictionary! This time for Godwin's Law which somehow has passed me by. You haven't necessarily lost the argument Richard; Wikipedia states: "Godwin's law itself can be abused as a distraction, diversion or even as censorship, fallaciously miscasting an opponent's argument as hyperbole when the comparisons made by the argument are actually appropriate."

[Stanley]

He's good isn't he Tiz..... I had to look it up as well. Thank you Richard for educating us once more!
The only comments on politics I have this morning are thank God Gove was stopped and hopefully the dreadful Leadsom as well. (See THIS) By the way, go and read the current Private Eye on this woman..... Her CV is a disaster if PE has got it right (and they usually do!). Worth noting some of her major backers, Bojo, Farage, IDS, Gove.... Do we need any further evidence?
Labour. What's the betting that a breakaway party is being planned as we wait for a resolution of the leadership battle? In some ways I would welcome it. We have to get a resolution somehow and if it has to be in an open split with the formation of a rival party so be it. What is certain is that we can't go on like this.

[PanBiker]

I noted yesterday that the media has likened Angela Eagles mornings to "Groundhog Day". Every morning they ask her if she is going to stand for leader and every morning the reply is the same, "Jeremy Corbyn should do the right thing and stand down". Her Constituency Party may well be doing the right thing with a very strong chance that she will be deselected. I have an idea that back in the day (1992) she was actually an imposed candidate. I think the CLP already had a left wing candidate but she was imposed by the NEC, she won but I reckon this may be coming back to bite her. She had previously tried her luck in Pendle but we didn't want her.

[Tizer]

Worth noting some of her major backers, Bojo, Farage, IDS, Gove.... Do we need any further evidence?

Speaking of whom, this image was one of the ideas for promotion by the Remain campaign but it was rejected unfortunately...

[Stanley]

Brilliant Tiz!! PE notes this week that the old saw about Britain being formed on the playing fields of Eton needs to be modified now, Britain was buggered by the drinking clubs of Eton.



Rudyard Kipling once said in a story that some people can see further through a millstone than others. I've always liked that concept and try to get behind the media mush we are fed. This thinking process brought me to a small but significant conclusion yesterday.
One thing we have all noted over the last couple of months is the Goebbels concept of 'The Big Lie' being deployed.... "We lose £350million a week to the EU" etc. It struck me that some far bigger lies have been damaged also but they have largely been unnoticed. Remember the way we were constantly assured that 'Class is Dead' and that there was no such thing as 'The North South Divide'? It seems to me that we are getting good evidence that both these statements are untrue. Class has reared its head once more as the effects of austerity policies bite home and increasingly damage the 'lower classes'. A quick look at the distribution of leave to remain votes and support for the Tory Party suggests that this also is a suspect concept. I'm not going to push this conjecture too far but I think it might give us a clue to what the trends will be as the full effects of Brexit become clear.
I see that the egregious Leadsom is once more using the despicable ploy of referring to the fact that Theresa May has no children. Charming...... (LINK)
Later, breaking news that reinforces my N@S divide conjecture. News that anti Corbyn MPS have had their platform passes rescinded at the forthcoming Durham Miner's Gala.

[PanBiker]

Dennis Skinner will be headlining alongside Jeremy at the Gala.

[Tizer]

Before reading Stanley's comments above I wrote this post in Sue's `Cheer me up' thread. I guess we are worrying about the same thing.
LINK

I think The Times has done the usual newspaper caper. Interview someone and then the headline writer picks something out that they think will stir up the biggest hornets' nest even if it's not a major part of the interview. In last Saturday's Times magazine they had an article about Joanna Lumley and the main paper had a front page banner with her pic together with the headline `My nervous breakdown'. There was only about one sentence on the breakdown in the article.

[PanBiker]

Angela Eagle has announced that she will formally challenge Jeremy Corbyn for the leadership of the Labour Party on Monday. Jeremy Corbyn has repeated that he will defend any such challenge to his leadership position.

[Stanley]

And about time too. As I noted earlier, the rebels have been working on their strategy and have now decided to go for it. I think this means that they have decided to risk splitting the party. If that is right, so be it, the boil has got to be lanced as soon as possible and a split isn't necessarily a bad thing in the long run.

[Tizer]

I've been saying all along that they should split because they'll never get on together. To an outsider like me the Corbynistas are the Traditionalists and the Blairite Eagles are the Modernisers. Let the Traditionalists keep the name, it's theirs by default, and the Modernisers need to find a new name (and not `new Labour'!). On the other hand it would probably be better if both lots dropped the name Labour, they need to appeal to a wider range of voters now. Whatever, they need to get themselves sorted soon or they'll lose traction.

[Tripps]

July 9th 2016. Emergency memo to all GCSE Economics exam markers.


Regarding the question - If a country's currency is rapidly falling, what action should a responsible Central Bank take regarding interest rates?

The standard historic answer - "They should be increased" is to be replaced by "They should be reduced"

Interest rates.

[Tizer]

I'm hoping it goes into a negative interest rate so that I can get the bank to pay me for taking my money out of my account!

[Stanley]

I note that Ossie is in New York and is going to try to persuade the US that contrary to what he has been saying in the last few weeks about Brexit being a disaster for the economy it is actually a Golden Opportunity to invest in a vibrant economy. This is smoke and mirrors without the smoke.....
I've been thinking about all the talk about a split in the Labour Party. This is simplistic and doesn't reflect what is actually happening. The anti Corbyn elements are using him as the lighting rod for what has been a long term project, the conversion of a party based on fighting to get a better society with more equality to benefit the lower classes to one which attracted 'the middle classes' by stealing the Tory clothes. The early leaders of the new party came from the grass roots and often via the unions. Then they increasingly came from better educated socially aware politicians like Atlee, remember that he was regarded with suspicion by many as a 'Champagne' politician but stuck to the founding principles. I suppose the event that triggered what became known as Blairite Labour was the sudden death of John Smith. The Blair project was always to reposition the Party in the Centre and in terms of electoral success it succeeded, not because of new socialist principles focussed on a modern society but mainly because the Tory Party was so dire. This of course came to an end because at its core, Blairite politics relied more on opportunism than principle and with the resurgence of the Tories we got where we are today. The present right wing of Labour, the anti Corbyn element, want to return to what they knew as the glory days of pragmatism and opportunism. Jeremy Corbyn is the ideal lightning rod for them. They want to take over the party, what they are really doing is fighting for an entirely new breakaway party and it's time they realised this and acted with the courage of their convictions. After all, they may be right! However they can remember what happened last time this was attempted and so are aiming to take over a going concern. With a majority of Blairites (although they would deny they are because the name is so tainted) in the PLP what has developed is a fight between them and the party members. That is their Achilles Heel and is the greatest danger to their project.
I don't know what is going to happen but have nailed my flag to principle and traditional Labour values. That's where I have been all my life. The next stage of the battle looks like an argument on a technical point, whether Jeremy will be allowed to contest. If this is what decides the outcome it will be a death blow for the Party and should be avoided. We shall see.......
Meanwhile, the Tory Party leadership fight is a demonstration of how cruel politics can be. A very nasty contest.
Later, Leadsom has apologised to May for the childless ploy saying it was all a misunderstanding. Yeah.....

[Tizer]

...the conversion of a party based on fighting to get a better society with more equality to benefit the lower classes to one which attracted 'the middle classes' by stealing the Tory clothes.

Nowadays I have a problem distinguishing who is lower class and who is middle class. Does the Labour Party have a definition or a mechanism for identifying such classes?

[PanBiker]

Game, set and match to Theresa May as Andrea Leadsom steps down. Apparently the leadership will go directly to Theresa May now without any kind of democratic vote so that's alright then, just a tick from the boys on the 1922 committee.

[plaques]

Nowadays I have a problem distinguishing who is lower class and who is middle class.

My own measure of the different 'classes' is how long you could survive without any income. This includes money from state hand outs or state pensions. ie: living off your savings. Some people may not last more than one week others may hold out for over a year. In the past anyone who had to work to sustain their living standards were considered part of the 'lower orders'. For the invisible 1% this thinking still probably holds true.