Actually i'm not in favour of settlement building in the west bank, in fact i think it threatens the very existence of Israel, also it's blatant land theft. I was hoping Herzog or Livni would be PM by now, but Israelis fell for right wing fear mongering and are stuck with a right wing government.
There would be a golden opportunity there to build a lasting peace with cooperation with the Palestinians. Israel has been undermining it's own legitimacy for decades and the right wing governments seem to just want to double down on everything. I hope the DBS strategy ultimately works like it worked with South Africa. The current situation is horrid and can't be allowed to go on
Not in my name. No support from Europe at the very least.
There would be a golden opportunity there to build a lasting peace with cooperation with the Palestinians. Israel has been undermining it's own legitimacy for decades and the right wing governments seem to just want to double down on everything. I hope the DBS strategy ultimately works like it worked with South Africa. The current situation is horrid and can't be allowed to go on
Not in my name. No support from Europe at the very least.
Whilst i don't support them in the West bank, i could never support a boycott of Israel whilst Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, and various other countries with terrible laws and records go un punished by the sentiment of Western publics.
Whilst i don't support them in the West bank, i could never support a boycott of Israel whilst Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, and various other countries with terrible laws and records go un punished by the sentiment of Western publics.
There is always something else going on. The theocratic nuttery in Saudi Arabia has nothing to do with Israel's settlement building, and the same forces behind DBS are also very critical about arms deals and such with the Saudis. This dodge doesn't work.
I'll also drop this now as we are drifting way off topic. On topic, the "antisemitic" accusation of Corbyn is a red herring.
There is always something else going on. The theocratic nuttery in Saudi Arabia has nothing to do with Israel's settlement building, and the same forces behind DBS are also very critical about arms deals and such with the Saudis. This dodge doesn't work.
I'll also drop this now as we are drifting way off topic. On topic, the "antisemitic" accusation of Corbyn is a red herring.
When it comes to the criticizing of Israeli government policy; the word, anti-Semitic, IS the red herring. Red Ken, stated the 'fact' that representatives of the German nationalists, had talks with representatives of the Jews, to discuss the migration of Jews out of Germany. These meetings took place in the early 1930s. Red Ken, then gets branded a fascist. Corbyn, who has probably, read the same account of history; will not 'condemn' Red Ken, for quoting historical facts. So Corbyn also becomes a fascist and anti-Semitic; along with anyone, who tries to explain. How this whole thing has been twisted.
Two pages late but when Corbyn said "friends" he was trying to broker peace talks. In those circumstances it was probable sensible decoding it as support is either tin-foil hat stuff or faux outrage. Here's his explanation of it :
"I'm saying that people I talk to, I use it in a collective way, saying our friends were prepared to talk.
Does it mean I agree with Hamas and what it does? No. Does it mean I agree with Hezbollah and what they do? No. What it means is that I think to bring about a peace process you have to talk to people with whom you may profoundly disagree.
There is not going to be any peace process unless there is talks involving Israel, Hezbollah and Hamas and I think everyone knows that."
I don't think Corbyn is an Anti semite, neither is Livingstone, i know the difference between Anti Zionism and Anti semitism, it's just as someone who is both pro military and pro Israel (in it's secular form) i am obviously not a huge fan of Corbyn.
I don't think Corbyn is an Anti semite, neither is Livingstone, i know the difference between Anti Zionism and Anti semitism, it's just as someone who is both pro military and pro Israel (in it's secular form) i am obviously not a huge fan of Corbyn.
Well, Islamophobia is a tricky word....if you mean it in the same way as Anti semitism, a pure hatred of any and every Muslim culture and person, then yes, they are the same disgusting thing. But if you take Islamophobia as the word suggests, then surely that's just a fear of the religion of Islam itself. I for one do fear Islam, if only because it's the only religion still growing and has a seemingly much higher percentage of radicals compared to other religions, think about it, lets say 5% of religious Jews hold terrifying beliefs they wish to enforce on everyone, it's nothing, 5% of 14 million will never be a threat to secular society, now take Christianity, much bigger and more dangerous than religious Judaism, allthough equally barbaric according to their holy books, however Christianity outside of Africa and parts of the USA has largely reformed itself, therefore imagine 10% of 1 billion Christians wants to enforce the bible upon us....that's a war we are winning, Christianity is declining. Now we take Islam, the newest of the three religions, still growing, equally disturbing holy book, lets say 20% of the current billion support Sharia law in some way, here is a war we are losing, the middleast is becoming far more radical, Turkish and Bangladeshi secularism has failed, every European country has a problem with Islamic extremism etc etc etc.....And people like Corbyn are the type ignore it and blame "western imperialism". Another related reason to not support Corbyn from a socialist party is that he said faith schools are good...what kind of secular socialist likes Catholic and Islamic run schools ? It's a joke. Note: the percentages i used could be higher or lower, i was just using them for arguments sake.
In general the "anti islam" stuff seems to be racism towards arabs and dark skinned people in Europe. Very few people know anything about Islam (like they know little about Judaism and Christianity as well to be honest).
People with poor access to education take religion more seriously, and those who live in poverty and have little hope of a better future tend to be angry and dangerous. I don't think Islam is inherently any more dangerous (or any less) than the other two Abrahamic religions. They are equally silly and contain horrid stuff in the "holy books" if people take them too literally.
Groups like ISIS have very little to do with religion, it's angry and clueless young men exploited by evil old men. Same for thousands of years. If we go to talk with some educated, liberal people in Iran or Turkey we will see that the flavour of monotheism doesn't matter at all (and hopefully in the future they will all fade away as so many other religions have, leaving only stories).
In general the "anti islam" stuff seems to be racism towards arabs and dark skinned people in Europe. Very few people know anything about Islam (like they know little about Judaism and Christianity as well to be honest).
People with poor access to education take religion more seriously, and those who live in poverty and have little hope of a better future tend to be angry and dangerous. I don't think Islam is inherently any more dangerous (or any less) than the other two Abrahamic religions. They are equally silly and contain horrid stuff in the "holy books" if people take them too literally.
Geoups like ISIS have very little to do with religion, it's angry and clueless young men exploited by evil old men. Same for thousands of years. If we go to talk with some educated, liberal people in Iran or Turkey we will see that the flavour of monotheism doesn't matter at all (and hopefully in the future they will all fade away as so many other religions have, leaving only stories).
Every single one of them is committed to triggering article 50. When that happens whatever they've promised or not promised will not matter. Events that take place beyond their control will define what they do, not whatever they say or have said recently.
Each one is insane though. The Tory leadership is not so much a poison challice as it is a cyanide factory.
i think it sort of applies here too, just in a different context. it's about time that we as citizens stop arguing about what politicians say, specially their scary or fairy bloody stupid tales, and start paying a little attention to what they actually do in office. we'd discover they are not at all that different, and that's just because we don't give a fig.
I think the Tories are more or less the same (obvious anti tory bias i know) but as far as the left goes i can see huge differences in the PLP, thats why i want the right one in charge, if i thought they were all the same i could happily vote for Corbyn, but i can't because there are huge differences in certain areas that as i stated, can't support. If the labour party were to split i would have to go with the center left despite identifying as a democratic socialist, which is a real shame, all Corbyn would need to do would be to give up on his Anti military, Anti trident and Anti Blair stances and he would unite the entire party and patriotic lefties like myself could support him like we should want to. (Allthough. i guess he can keep his Anti Blair stance, at least he is consistent unlike John Prescott)
If the labour party were to split i would have to go with the center left despite identifying as a democratic socialist, which is a real shame, all Corbyn would need to do would be to give up on his Anti military, Anti trident and Anti Blair stances and he would unite the entire party and patriotic lefties like myself could support him like we should want to. (Allthough. i guess he can keep his Anti Blair stance, at least he is consistent unlike John Prescott)
Even if he did that wouldn't unite the country behind him. Not even close.
The man has no charisma, no leadership (he can't even get his backbenchers to stick with him), and the worst political instincts I've ever seen in my entire life. That's not even hyperbole. I recently turned 40 and this guy is the worst I've seen as far as reading and responding to the public mood. Here is Corbyn at a rally recently.
Put yourelf in the position of a swinging voter. Maybe earning 30k a year, maybe have a kid. You work for an engineering firm, fettling railtracks for example. Life for you, at the moment, is pretty comfortable. You get paid enough for your car and your mortgage, a bit of your cash is going into private pension. You can't afford to send your kids to a private school and you can't afford private health cover, so you rely on those public services. Nevertheless you have no need to claim any sort of state benefit and you have a pretty big certainty of having a job for the forseeable future.
This describes an awful lot of people in this nation.
Give them a choice, Blair or Corbyn. One is offering a completely different direction for the nation, to help people who aren't you, and the message is either delivered via angry ranting or dry statement. The other is saying that he won't rock the boat, that he has a firm idea for economic prosperity, and that what the country makes will be spent on things you really need (schools, hospitals), and the message is delivered with (well choreographed) statesmanship and confidence.
The above voter I described outlines the general demographic you need to reach out to in order to secure a decent share of the nations vote. For all his faults, Tony Blair understood this. Corbyn doesn't. He will condemn Labour to a defeat and the PLP who do have political instincts know it.
Show me one thing Corbyn has said which appeals to business and commerce. One time he has talked about how our economy should be shaped or what measures he would take to increase economic prosperity. I can't hear any of that but that's exactly what he needs to be saying to garner more votes.
I think the Tories are more or less the same (obvious anti tory bias i know) but as far as the left goes i can see huge differences in the PLP, thats why i want the right one in charge, if i thought they were all the same i could happily vote for Corbyn, but i can't because there are huge differences in certain areas that as i stated, can't support. If the labour party were to split i would have to go with the center left despite identifying as a democratic socialist, which is a real shame, all Corbyn would need to do would be to give up on his Anti military, Anti trident and Anti Blair stances and he would unite the entire party and patriotic lefties like myself could support him like we should want to. (Allthough. i guess he can keep his Anti Blair stance, at least he is consistent unlike John Prescott)
Personally, it was these that attracted me to Corbyn. The only time I've ever been attracted to Labour frankly.
Corbyn attracted huge support from many like me. He seemed to be a man if integrity in Parliament as well, which was a refreshing change.
I began to loose interest in him when he reverted to form in Scotland. Granted, as a S England resident, that may not seem to affect me directly, but it did suggest his apparent integrity was rather more fluid than it seemed.
Labour and the Torys both seem to be weighed down with internal divisions. In the Tory's case it is largely centred around the EU, in Labour's it's a bit more fundamental.
It's probably too much to ask, but for the good of the country, it might be nice if these parties would split into rather more honest and separate parts. Then we could take all of them seriously.
Social democrats aren't supposed to be so far to the right as Blair and his ilk. That "new labour" move to the centre happened pretty much all over, and it has gutted the ideology of the social democrat parties. We need to focus on social security and public health care. Playing the centre-right "socialist" game only means that the right wing conservative parties don't have their policies challenged at all.
I don't know if Corbyn can get anything done in the UK, but I do know that the social democratic movement has to find it's spine. This is coming from a Green Party voter (which is a real party in Finland as in Germany, not the bunch that taints itself with hippy mysticism and homeopathy like in the UK).
Well Fuzzy, i would 100% vote for Tony Blair over Corbyn, on that we agree (assuming you would actually be willing to vote for Blair again even though you may think he's a war criminal). And Surfinjo, i guess we finally agree....a spilt may be better for voters, people will be able to vote for what they really want within the left.
Social democrats aren't supposed to be so far to the right as Blair and his ilk. That "new labour" move to the centre happened pretty much all over, and it has gutted the ideology of the social democrat parties. We need to focus on social security and public health care. Playing the centre-right "socialist" game only means that the right wing conservative parties don't have their policies challenged at all.
That's true, but look at the nation they have to work with. This is a highly xenophobic and anti-intellectuallist nation at this point, with the focus on individualism and populism. It is the diametric opposite of rational collectivism, so that sort of politics, which is my sort of politics, is a non-starter.
I don't know if Corbyn can get anything done in the UK, but I do know that the social democratic movement has to find it's spine. This is coming from a Green Party voter (which is a real party in Finland as in Germany, not the bunch that taints itself with hippy mysticism and homeopathy like in the UK).
The only way to make headway in England and Wales (not Scotland and I don't know about Ulster) is to play the long game. Get elected on Blairs political ground of center/right-center politics, then work on the newspapers. Bring the print media of this country under control and hold them to some sort of account. De-propagandize and re-educate the public. Then, maybe, things would be cleaner here.
Bit right now Corbyn is going nowhere and we're about to get Thatcher Mk. 2
Center Left politics will work eventually, Theresa May is Center right (not quite as bad as hard right Thatcher i suspect), but as a labour voter i consider the Blairites to be center left, that's not ideal for the party but my reasons for not supporting the current hard left have been stated.
Meanwhile, in Manchester, at the exact same time Leadsom announced she was standing down, ex-shadow business secretary Angela Eagle was launching her own leadership bid to oust Jeremy Corbyn as leader of the Labour party.
After completing her speech, Eagle eagerly dived into questions from the media.
Except, umm, there aren't any.
Because everyone was already racing back to London to report on Theresa May's imminent coronation as prime minister.
BBC? Anyone? No? OK... Robert Peston where are you?
The giggling from the room is hide-your-face-behind-a-cushion level cringe.
... Michael Crick...?
Someone off camera responds with a halfhearted 'Yes?' but doesn't follow up with a question.
....And Eagle gets to stand there nervously shifting from foot to foot.
What a time to try and become the leader of a British political party.
I see where you are coming from. That's depressing but it does sound fairly realistic. If you had proportional voting Corbyn would be a good Socialist party leader getting some 8-10% of the vote and a reasonable member in a coalition. He probably can't make PM if your assessment is correct.
That's true, but look at the nation they have to work with. This is a highly xenophobic and anti-intellectuallist nation at this point, with the focus on individualism and populism. It is the diametric opposite of rational collectivism, so that sort of politics, which is my sort of politics, is a non-starter.
The only way to make headway in England and Wales (not Scotland and I don't know about Ulster) is to play the long game. Get elected on Blairs political ground of center/right-center politics, then work on the newspapers. Bring the print media of this country under control and hold them to some sort of account. De-propagandize and re-educate the public. Then, maybe, things would be cleaner here.
Bit right now Corbyn is going nowhere and we're about to get Thatcher Mk. 2
Yep and did anyone notice that actually our sovereign parliament debated brexit issues several times last week, but it was hardly reported because the media were too worried about reporting personality stuff and whether people with children would be a better PM or not.
