[Oldmanmatt]

Of course.

But that last post of yours describes “Social Democracy”  (Scandinavian model) and Corbyn advocates something quite a way beyond that. However, I think he’s still more pragmatic than the author of that piece and it is the author we are calling Marxist (at least, I am).

I would call myself a Social Democrat tending to Liberal.

[Somebody's Fool]

From reading the article, I would say he's an academic with a knowledge of Marxist theory. It's a bit of a leap to suggest he advocates we become a communist country.

[Schnell]

https://www.opendemocracy.net/uk/jeremy-gilbert/inevitable-division-politics-and-consequences-of-labour-split
A summation of current state of the Labour Party.

From the above article:
For the Labour left, the political conclusions to be drawn from this analysis are stark, but important. As I’ve already suggested - we should not be responding to the behaviour of the centrists with simple moral indignation. Their entire project is to wrap up their defence of their own elite interests in a language of moral indignation – accusing the Left of racism, of being responsible for Brexit, of ‘bullying’ (ie expecting elected representatives to be accountable to members and constituents).

If you don't mind me saying so, what an absolute crock of shit. This entire article is a hackneyed, intellectually bankrupt Marxist diatribe. When will the far left realise that Marxism is a broken ideology? There really are not any happy, progressive countries that subscribe to this sort of political ethos.
The denials of anti semitism are particularly galling.

The reference to accountability is ridiculous. Clearly a reference to MPs for 'leave' voting constituencies campaigning for remain, it ignores the entire idea of representative democracy. MPs are elected to represent the peoples best interests, not to be dictated to by the electorate.

Well if you don't mind me saying so, your response is also nonsense. Many countries political history is a history of conflict between different ideologies and traditions and their current state is the product of these conflicts. Many of the most progressive countries, take the Nordics as an example, have in the past had very strong socialist and Marxist-inflected political and trade union movements which are directly responsible for their strong, if eroding, welfare states. Free and universal social services which I, for one, am very much in favour of, education, health etc are complete anathema to capitalist ideology and i would absolutely hate to live in an unambiguously capitalist economy. On a different note, if Marxism if a broken ideology why does that anytime anyone so much as hoists a red flag the imperialist armies suddenly arrive.. eh but doesnt it collapse on its own?

On the accountability point, eh the Independent Group are completely non-accountable. They're registered as a private company, they have no members to be accountable to and they don't disclose their donors. They were elected on Labour manifesto and have subsequently flatly rejected any suggestions of by-elections. Meanwhile their members complete ludicrously unpopular policies, a la Angela Smiths fanaticism about the privatisation of water. In other words she supports a policy that the majority of her voters reject but is unwilling to be held accountable for it.

[TobyD]

https://www.opendemocracy.net/uk/jeremy-gilbert/inevitable-division-politics-and-consequences-of-labour-split
A summation of current state of the Labour Party.

From the above article:
For the Labour left, the political conclusions to be drawn from this analysis are stark, but important. As I’ve already suggested - we should not be responding to the behaviour of the centrists with simple moral indignation. Their entire project is to wrap up their defence of their own elite interests in a language of moral indignation – accusing the Left of racism, of being responsible for Brexit, of ‘bullying’ (ie expecting elected representatives to be accountable to members and constituents).

If you don't mind me saying so, what an absolute crock of shit. This entire article is a hackneyed, intellectually bankrupt Marxist diatribe. When will the far left realise that Marxism is a broken ideology? There really are not any happy, progressive countries that subscribe to this sort of political ethos.
The denials of anti semitism are particularly galling.

The reference to accountability is ridiculous. Clearly a reference to MPs for 'leave' voting constituencies campaigning for remain, it ignores the entire idea of representative democracy. MPs are elected to represent the peoples best interests, not to be dictated to by the electorate.

the most progressive countries, take the Nordics as an example, have in the past had very strong socialist and Marxist-inflected political and trade union movements which are directly responsible for their strong, if eroding, welfare states......
On a different note, if Marxism if a broken ideology why does that anytime anyone so much as hoists a red flag the imperialist armies suddenly arrive.. eh but doesnt it collapse on its own?

Point one, though they no doubt have many advantages Scandanavian countries still have massive issues with poverty and significant social problems as all countries do really. They have also in the past had some very right wing tendencies. I don't think you can say they're a victory for Marxism.

Marxism does very well at self destructing under the auspices of leaders who are very happy to be a little more equal than others.

[andy popp]

I don't think you can say they're a victory for Marxism.

Nor would they claim to be; they're capitalist and social democratic.

[TobyD]

I don't think you can say they're a victory for Marxism.

Nor would they claim to be; they're capitalist and social democratic.

Yes, exactly. Social democracy obviously can result in successful states with relatively high quality of life, and relatively happy populations.
I can't think of any Marxist states whose leaders haven't become significantly autocratic if not totalitarian, and generally their populations poorer, and often desperate to emigrate.

[andy popp]

Apologies, I think I probably misunderstood the post I replied to.

[TobyD]

Apologies, I think I probably misunderstood the post I replied to.

No apologies necessary! I didn't take your comment as criticism anyway.

I apologise if some of my above comments are a little ranty; I get frustrated with the idea that the hard left policies that have left many countries impoverished over the last century might suddenly work.

[Oldmanmatt]

Apologies, I think I probably misunderstood the post I replied to.

No apologies necessary! I didn't take your comment as criticism anyway.

I apologise if some of my above comments are a little ranty; I get frustrated with the idea that the hard left policies that have left many countries impoverished over the last century might suddenly work.

Amen.

But I’d add the same sentiments, about unrestrained Free market and populist/right wing policies too.

Fructose sake! Any team functions successfully, only on compromise, playing the individuals strengths and supporting their weaknesses.

Never will understand,why as a society we can grasp that fact in the macro, but fail to see it as a necessity of society at large.

[Schnell]

I don't think you can say they're a victory for Marxism.

Nor would they claim to be; they're capitalist and social democratic.

I absolutely would claim improved welfare and progressive reforms to be victories for socialist movements in many cases. The construction of the welfare state was achieved under sustained pressure from trade union and socialist movements and reforms were only conceded when it was that or potentially even greater disruption. Many of these reforms are now remembered as the enlightened granting of rights by social democrats but they were won through struggle and class conflict, take universal suffrage as an example:

https://www.jacobinmag.com/2018/12/workers-movement-universal-suffrage-socialism-second-international

I'm not claiming these were all won by movements and politicians who were committed socialists and absolutely wanted a socialist society but socialism/Marxism has been a consistent influence on progressive movements for social and economic justice. Many progressive reforms they were won by people who believed in class struggle, democratic control of the economy and rolling back the extension of markets, which are core socialist demands.

[Oldmanmatt]

Socialism and collectivism, vastly predate Marxs. I don’t believe anyone commenting is denying the socialist aspects of those nations, such as the Scandinavian region, or our own nation, come to that.
I think most of us would dispute this constitutes Marxism, which is an extreme form of socialism, no? The examples of successful nations, represent a compromise between socialism and capitalism, which I’m fairly sure is distinct from Marxism and generally refered to as Social Democracy?



 

[TobyD]

Socialism and collectivism, vastly predate Marxs. I don’t believe anyone commenting is denying the socialist aspects of those nations, such as the Scandinavian region, or our own nation, come to that.
I think most of us would dispute this constitutes Marxism, which is an extreme form of socialism, no? The examples of successful nations, represent a compromise between socialism and capitalism, which I’m fairly sure is distinct from Marxism and generally refered to as Social Democracy?

Yes I pretty much agree. There may be some debate about precise definitions of -isms or - ocracies but it all comes down to the same thing; extremes of political thought on the right or left are equally as catastrophic for nation states and equally seem to produce and promote the worst in human beings.

So really, the UK should just stay in the bloody EU and have a nice tedious centrist coalition government.
Chuka Amuna on any questions this evening sounded far more statesman like than either of the current main party leaders. NB I'm not saying I think he should be PM.

[tomtom]

Danny Dyer (dire?) sounds more statesmanlike than ‘May or Corbyn to be fair :D

[Oldmanmatt]

Danny Dyer (dire?) sounds more statesmanlike than ‘May or Corbyn to be fair :D

My ten week old Collie puppy, is more intelligent and has better leadership skills.


And that little sod keeps eating my shoes and shitting on the carpet.

[tomtom]

Danny Dyer (dire?) sounds more statesmanlike than ‘May or Corbyn to be fair :D

My ten week old Collie puppy, is more intelligent and has better leadership skills.


And that little sod keeps eating my shoes and shitting on the carpet.

I have it on good account that’s Danny Dyer is toilet trained.

#10 still has newspaper sheets all over the floor.

[TobyD]

Danny Dyer (dire?) sounds more statesmanlike than ‘May or Corbyn to be fair :D

Now you mention it, I think Peppa Pig would absolutely hand it to Corbyn in a debate about anything.

[tc]

From the State Propaganda Agency today:

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-47363307?SThisFB&fbclid=IwAR3G1C2anECDEd-Q0AdDPTKWPNHxm6y0lnukVt45qEXH-mzo83PIbhDJCl8

Labour now prepared to back a second referendum. Good. Proceeding according to Labour policy agreed at Conference. Agreed by Members; not dictated by Corbyn. Also good.

[tomtom]

Interesting to see how this pans out over the next few days. My first thoughts were:

All feels a bit too little too late... and it might galvanise the Tory party to support Mays deal (rather than support anything Labour)... anyway we'll see and its better news than anything else that has happened to date!

Then:

Emily Thornbury is saying (via Grauniad website) the referendum would be remain vs Tory Brexit (her words)... and Labour would campaign for remain. She's an on message front bencher so thats probably the main message.

[tc]

Interesting take on it from the New Statesman:

"Frontbench advocates of the plan say it will service both halves of Labour's electoral coalition: those in leave seats can sell it as a vote for a deal, while those in remain areas can cast it as a vote for a new referendum."

[Oldmanmatt]

Labour are demanding a deal, that looks a lot like “staying in, in all but name”, which seems like lead balloon material...

[TobyD]

Labour are demanding a deal, that looks a lot like “staying in, in all but name”, which seems like lead balloon material...

Sadly Labour saying that they want a second referendum under these circumstances is nothing to do with leave / remain, and everything to do with trying to stop more defections.

[largeruk]

Robert Peston's interpretation of today's political pirouetting, arguing that today’s long-term winners from May’s u-turn may well be Mogg and the ERG Brexiters rather than Rudd and the Gaukward Squad threatening to resign from government.

https://www.facebook.com/1498276767163730/posts/2286295155028550/

[Oldmanmatt]

Well, gives us time to sort out our pallets, at least...

https://amp.businessinsider.com/brexit-michael-gove-ministers-to-hold-emergency-meeting-over-no-deal-chaos-2019-2?r=US&IR=T&__twitter_impression=true&fbclid=IwAR0pYTWM_xO62mPPXoLXq4e3kEe8ioT4u3HZ_hx44gZVbuMAUuDNz2yuPYg

[Oldmanmatt]

Oh, and show this to most of the ERG, and Brexit will be off....

https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-britain-eu-brexit-shooting-idUKKCN1QF1TB?utm_campaign=trueAnthem%3A+Trending+Content&utm_content=5c759c5e4b73850001dc0bff&utm_medium=trueAnthem&utm_source=facebook

[Oldmanmatt]

Quick one.

Has anybody come across anyone, still arguing that Brexit will be of net benefit to the nation and can you link to it?