For many, Brexit is like being given the truly awful present of a colourful tank top by your favourite auntie who lives on the next street and who you bump into at least three times a week.
It is the gift that keeps on shitting on the mat.
It has been over four months since I wrote a politics blog; a large percentage of that time has been spent writing a massive tome about why leaving the EU might not be such a stupid idea, if the right party is in power when it happens. However, since I last did any work on it, Boris Johnson has become PM (by default); Brexit has gone up several ladders and slid down as many snakes; we've gone from Treeza's 'Brexit means Brexit' and 'Nothing Has Changed' to BJ's 'Dead in a Ditch' and the Libdems abstaining from a vote which, in the event of a shit Brexit deal would stop the NHS being sold off to the highest Yankee bidder (thus proving the LibDems really can't be trusted with anything apart from taking the trash out - themselves).
What I can't understand is why Boris's first 10 attempts at getting a GE are not as important as the current one, which has the media going full scale nuclear on Labour's arse. Unless this is a rouse?
Boris is high in the polls (nearly where Treeza was when she called a GE in 2017) and everyone continues to try to demonise that Corbyn fella, blaming him for everything and then a bit more. BJ's trying every possible way to call a Christmas General Election now that's he's failed to get one any earlier. In many ways he sounds like an opposition leader trying to get the PM to resign and call a vote, and I suppose in a way he is in opposition. The thing is so many Tories (who voted for the Fix Term Parliament Act) are so desperate for a GE they really are sounding desperate; but is that desperation because they're so confident they can win big or is it, for the rather surreal reason, that they think they might lose.
There's a reason for this, which I'd like to explain because it does sound a wee bit crazoo...
There is a very good chance that a General Election will deliver us with another hung parliament; in fact, talk to any pollster and despite their affiliation to the Tories they will honestly say they couldn't put their hands on their hearts and forecast a massive Tory win. If we have a hung parliament then there's going to be a huge chance that there will be too many anti-Brexit MPs for whoever forms a government to achieve Brexit without, at minimum, a second referendum. The constitutional dilemma facing the Brexiteer Tories is another hung parliament pretty much guarantees more Brexit deadlock and can you imagine if we're still trying to sort out extracting the eggs from a baked cake in 2025? Can you imagine what the population will be like?
In a poll held in the last week of 1000 Leavers and 1000 Remainers, 63% of Leavers felt that civil unrest, violence and another MP's death was 'a price worth paying' to get Brexit done. Rather scarily (because it flies in the face of my belief) 53% of Remainers feel the same way... It might not be obvious - apart from the rise in hate crime - but tempers are simmering; hate and vile comments are increasing and it won't be long before something boils over. The division is now so great, I reckon we're on the brink of an existential civil war.
But back to the deadlock... Would Boris really want to be PM in charge of the same parliamentary numbers? Would Boris keep trying with subsequent general elections in the hope that eventually he gets the result he wants? That is a joke, but given this PM and his (lack of) success rate, I wouldn't put it past him. There's also the fact that despite being Mr Popular, he's also not particularly trusted, even by his supporters. He's seen as a slightly Machiavellian character and while that appeals to some people, he needs some victories to make him truly electable and for people to stop scrutinising him and his flippy-floppy nature.
Fortunately, he has the Mainstream Media on his side and they're not going to scrutinise him as much as they scrutinise Labour and Corbyn, but as we learnt from Treeza's botched effort in 2017, the MSM stopped trying to besmirch Corbyn because they realised it doesn't do much but make people wonder why everyone attacks this gentle man, who has an allotment and wants a fairer country for all - yes, they can call him a terrorist sympathiser (it's a shame Mo Mowlam isn't still alive to tell the wankers who keep perpetrating this myth that we wouldn't be where we are in Northern Ireland if Corbyn hadn't been on her team forging the Good Friday Agreement; but why let a fact get in the way of casting aspersions?) or they can call him a socialist or a commie, but people might also start thinking, "Well, we've had the Tories for 10 years, I'm worse off, no one trusts politicians any more, no one knows who to believe - why should I give them another go at screwing up the country they've made a good fist of screwing up already?" Labour won a lot of votes in 2017 on this fact alone; we're three years down the line and the Tories don't exactly cover themselves with glory, do they?
So, would Boris and his ERG buddies really want to be in charge of a parliament that will be as intransigent as it currently is? Or would they maybe think, 'Sod this for a game of soldiers, let's see if Commie Boy and his band of cultural misfits can do any better. If he fucks up we'll win by a landslide and can do all the things we wanted to do but legitimately and hey, we're all still young enough...'
I know this is an unlikely scenario, but Treeza's 16 point lead over Labour disappeared faster than a Boris Johnson prediction and Boris hasn't got that lead. When people start talking about the country's issues rather than Brexit, the Tories have a problem because no one really trusts them, not even their largely intelligent middle class supporters (forget working class Tory voters; they could have their children put up chimneys and they'd still vote Tory, because... [insert utter bullshit here]).
Plus there's the 1945 scenario. At the end of the Second World War, Winston Churchill - a hero of BJ - was walking on water; if there were personal approval ratings in 1945 he was as popular as Jesus and the election was going to deliver a Tory government who would do whatever Tory governments did in the first half of the 20th century, except they got annihilated. People decided they wanted something new to rebuild the country; to build houses, hospitals for the new NHS, more schools, more infrastructure - create jobs so that everybody post-war could contribute to the return of GREAT Britain. This current situation isn't much different than then, or at least that's the way it's being painted.
One last thing for the benefit of the moaners - not the remoaners, but the people fed up with it all, fed up with MPs for spoiling life by dragging Brexit out. I know there's a lot of people who think we should just leave; tell the EU to fuck off and go it alone. Even if that were possible Northern Ireland is part of the UK. I know that English Brextremists couldn't give a shit about the Irish, but there are a lot of people who do, not least some of the people we hope to make free trade deals with. If Northern Ireland is even in the same universe as a return to the troubles then we really would be fucked. You can dismiss this as project fear or say I don't know what I'm talking about, but pretty much all of the problems now to do with Brexit is how to extricate Northern Ireland from the Irish Republic without causing a civil war and how to do it to keep 10 fruit and nutcase DUP MPs happy. This is akin to giving a chimp 10 Rubics cubes and telling him in Cantonese that he has 10 seconds to solve them all - pretty much impossible without some shit being thrown first and a lot of anger.
This, along with the actual fear of economic oblivion, are the two reasons why so many MPs have thwarted Brexit. We elect them to serve us, yes. But we also elect them to do the best for us; to make the decisions that are not going to cause us great hardship and that's all of us, including the people who voted remain and those that through whatever reason didn't vote at all. I know that Leave voters hate the fact that they didn't win by 99% to 1% but dem's da facts; the referendum 'victory' wasn't a win-all-and-exterminate-the-losers kind of deal; concessions have to be made to try and make as many people reasonably happy as possible and to make sure that even the most rabid of Brexiteers don't starve to death, die of a lack of medicines or most likely get blown up by an Irish Republican bomb while Christmas shopping in Sunderland.
Most people say, 'I don't do politics' but in 2019 most everyone does, even if it's to call MPs 'wankers' or wonder when it's all going to stop. What is even more crazier than my belief the Tories might actually want to lose the election is that all those people who convinced Leavers that the sunlit uplands of Britain would be awash with diamond encrusted Unicorns dispensing money and free sex to everyone are now the same people claiming they never said it would be better and people actually voted to be worse off and culturally bereft. If Aaron Sorkin introduced this kind of story when he was doing The West Wing he probably would have been told the show was trying to stay as realistic as physically possible.
Whatever happens, just remember most of the MPs have been pissing you off to ultimately save you. You might not see it and you certainly don't appreciate it, but at some point in the future you might wish they'd succeeded.
We probably need to leave to shut down the right wing; to stop all this talk and focus on how to fix the country. That depends on who is in charge when it happens. If you work for someone be very careful about who you vote for when that day comes, because one of the parties actively talks about how citizens rights prevents the country from competing with Tiger economies; that same party would be happy to see sickness, maternity and holiday pay outlawed, because it would mean employers could get rid of whoever they didn't like and replace them with people equally as expendable. That same party thinks the NHS is a drain on resources and would like swathes of it privatised and that same party wants to keep reducing public spending while giving the richest 10% more money (which, if you are a Tory voter can you explain to me how that benefits anyone apart from the already very rich?)
If you want a future of uncertainty, fear and no security, you know which party is already offering you this. It's led by a buffoon and his army of posh wankers who wouldn't piss on the average Brit unless there was a fat cash bonus involved.
You don't do politics? Maybe you should. It's as important to humans as breathing; it affects every aspect of your life whether you want to believe it or not and 99% of the time it's instigated by ourselves and has nothing to do with 'unelected' (they are) 'bureaucrats' (aren't all politicians) in Brussels. People need to understand how it works otherwise they will continue to rage at all the wrong things.
The Politics of ...
Showing posts with label #UKElection. Show all posts
Showing posts with label #UKElection. Show all posts
Friday, 25 October 2019
Tuesday, 26 July 2016
Prophets and Loss
Most people that know me, know that I'm interested in politics, but, by my own admission, I'm no expert and I'm often shown things that I was ignorant of or that flies in the face of my beliefs. Recently I've been accused of being a 'blind Corbyn supporter' because I refuse to see the damage he's doing to the Labour Party - internally. But like many other slightly disgruntled people, I look at the man I see and not the Machiavellian machinations that are obviously going on with or without his blessing and then I'm mocked for either being too naive or too altruistic or deluded because I refuse to see the wider picture. I do see the wider picture and what I see has been commented on in these pages many times - career politicians putting their own interests ahead of the people and therefore not acting in my best interests, despite representing the party I've supported all of my life.
Like right wing leaning people, I tend to stick with my 'tribe' and therefore spend a lot of time preaching to the converted and have probably been labelled a 'loony leftie' by many of my more moderate friends and relatives, who sometimes view my politics as 'harmful' and 'non-negotiable', but I hope they will at least recognise my commitment to my beliefs. However, in this very narcissistic world we live in now, I can't help but want to get a big massive trumpet out and start blowing it loudly from the hills.
Talking to an equally 'radical' friend the other night, I made the rather modest (highly unusual for me) statement that I must be some kind of prophet. After the hilarity of the statement dissipated, I quantified my statement: Since I resurrected this blog last year, I've focused a lot on the Brexit issue and the turmoil in British politics. I've made lots of forecasts, based on my feelings rather than the biased press and media, and an incredibly huge amount of them have come true. With hindsight, some of the observations I made seem more lucid and realistic now than they possibly did when I was sounding like a conspiracy theorist on steroids and many of the things I said weren't echoed in the press - ever; many of the questions I asked ended up being asked when it was too late and while I have no doubt many other bloggers sensed the real feeling around the country, I didn't see the politicians, the media and all of their assorted bandwagons have the same kind of handle on the 'mood' as I did from dog walks, work and general conversations with people.
How can someone so politically naive, with no formal qualifications in the subject, and an interest generated more through suspicion than through faith in politicians have got it right so many times and yet people who get paid loads of money failed to see, or more importantly, listen to the people outside of their front doors? Is his more evidence of a media agenda or are these people simply not as astute, as expert, as we like to believe?
Politicians really need to have a good hard look, not just at themselves but at the 60-odd million people living here (there's that famous altruism shining through). If nothing else people have made it clear that they no longer trust politicians of any kind - the left despise the right and vice versa and there hasn't really ever been a middle ground, despite whatever heights the Libdems reached, all that was was the first signs of a disgruntled nations starting to grow tired of the same old same old.
Look at Farage. Honestly, I'm not as obsessed with the man in real life, but in political terms I consider him to have had more impact on a nation than very few politicians in the last 50 years, possibly Thatcher being the exception. The incredible thing about him is his ability to turn repeated failures into some kind of perverse victory (all aided and abetted by our hard right media); like some kind of carcinogenic Eddie the Eagle his resilience is a thing to behold; Oswald Moseley probably would have seen him as a future PM. Yet there is no arguing with how he has single-handedly turned UKIP into the third largest party in the country (by vote share).
The real shame of UKIP is they have inadvertently tapped into the general malaise of the average working man, something one of the other parties should have done - knowingly. Historically this is probably totally inaccurate, but UKIP appeared to be a semi-respectable face of British Nationalism when it started; almost like they realised there was a hot bed of xenophobes and casual racists out there all ignorant enough to want to blame anything foreign for their ills and woes. The problem is, that party is a disorganised shambles, even compared to the Labour Party, if they had a collective brain they could be very dangerous.
In 2001, a good friend of mine said to me in a pub in Nottingham, "Do you know what we should do? We should join the Conservative Party." I stared at him in utter disbelief. "No, wait, hear me out. They are such a disorganised rabble at the moment that anyone with a half decent idea can walk into that party and change it. Until they get proper people running it again they'll never get elected." Obviously we never joined and even if we had, I'm sure there was someone somewhere in CCO planning a future that didn't involve two 'socialist' men just about to turn 40; but the point is UKIP by and large seems like a party with no real reason to exist, except maybe to steal votes from the disgruntled, diluting voter share even more and giving the Tories an easier path to complete dominance. What better way to win an election than by duping former die-hard Labour voters to vote for a party that politically is further to the right than the party they claim to despise. Oh the irony. The point is with proper 21st century politicians running it, UKIP could be a serious threat. We should be thankful for small mercies.
I've often heard the phrase 'the government is out of touch with its people' and, to be honest, I've often felt that was a throwaway comment; I've never felt governments have ever really been in touch with the people. However, for the first time in my 50-odd years, I believe that statement is more pertinent now than ever before, except it isn't the government who is out of touch, it's the entire political machine. Do you know why Jeremy Corbyn is probably perceived as more of a threat to the status quo than him just being a mad Trot? Because he did something last year that has stopped happening with our politicians - he went out and talked to people. I remember general elections when I was growing up and right up until about 2007 with politicians doing what we want them to, engaging with the voters, on doorsteps, at rallies, on market squares, with soapbox in hand; listening to the people and trying to reflect that in their politics. But something happened and media took over and more and more people grew to dislike politicians and it was no longer safe for many politicians to walk the streets of their constituencies; the more Westminster lost touch with the real people, the more real people grew to hate them.
The death of Jo Cox was systematic of what has happened and how people are no longer connected to their representatives, even the ones like Cox who was more engaging than others. Obviously this incident isn't going to have the MPs flooding onto the streets to gauge opinion and engage with their voters and Cox's death might also have signalled the death of any true links MPs will have to local non-political communities. There is now no way people aren't going to view them all as aloof, privileged and not reflecting what they'd like to believe.
Former Labour MP for Northampton South and now Green councillor for the County Council, Tony Clarke, won his seat in 1997, despite traditionally it always being a Tory seat, because he got out and knocked on doors, talked to people, won over their trust, even if they weren't Labour voters and he was regarded as the left of a then newly-modernised and centre New Labour. Yet, he used the swell of opinion mixed with actual hard work to win his seat and then just about retain it later. That doesn't happen any more or if it does prospective MPs and incumbents tend to pick and choose the areas they canvas - therefore are probably preaching to the converted and those who will probably vote anyhow.
The sad thing is that my forecasts weren't intended to be scaremongering, they were intended to highlight what might or would probably happen, from my perspective, and almost as if I scripted it personally, everything from Cameron to Johnson to Eagle's resignations to the economic instability has come true; even my reluctance to believe that Leave would probably win in the two weeks leading up to the vote...
So what does the self-proclaimed new guru of political forecasting believe will happen now? Well, returning to my radical friend and our sage-like weekly conversations about the state of the nation; he believes Theresa May should call a general election in November, because if Labour is in civil war and looking totally unelectable, then she'd be stupid not to. My response to that is 'too risky'. The media might be telling us one thing, and for sure Labour is valiantly trying to destroy itself, but I think there's a definite feeling within the Tory party that people don't want more politics thrust upon them and now we've had one monumental protest vote - with repercussions for decades likely - in this decade of crazy shit happening, the last thing is for a cocky Tory party to go back to the country and end up being in a coalition again. Or worse still, a turn out of less than 40% would not make any mandate legitimate in the majority's eyes. Tories want a few years of crisis managing the economy and trying to be as anodyne as possible to the masses.
On Thursday of last week, I was convinced that the Labour Party coup was going to blow itself out and some kind of uneasy truce will have been found that could have at least taken the party forward, but sadly events escalated again and the civil war is actually getting uglier and unbelievably harmful to democracy in this country. I said in another blog that this is no longer a battle to oust Corbyn but a movement to shut down his wing of the party. The PLP want the left eradicated from the party completely, and not because they've read the mood of the public and seen the future, but because they've seen the future and their careers are at stake.
So technically speaking, May doesn't need to call an election because, at the moment, the Tories have no effective opposition; their majority might as well be 100.
As a Corbyn supporter, how do I feel about what has been happening? This was a question I was asked just the other day and my answer was tempered by my current bemusement with life in general. This is how I see it; a year ago, feeling wounded by a really disappointing election campaign with a leader less electable than Neil Kinnock and left wondering just what the Labour had to do to make itself more popular than a government that was very unpopular, but still won? Despite my interest in politics, I didn't know Jeremy Corbyn from a hole in the ground and like many people indoctrinated by the media, I thought he was the sacrificial left-wing lamb to show some range of democracy in a relatively anodyne leadership contest. Then, like many others, I started to see this groundswell of support for a reasonable man, unruffled by the hyperbole of 21st century politics, talking sense in a crazy political world. The opposition towards him started before he even won and I forecast the tensions ahead of him, without realising just how low it could sink.
I cannot deny Corbyn represents a wing of the Labour Party that the establishment dislikes and is prone to being labelled extremists and like the far right, the extreme left attracts its own kind of loonies. I saw Corbyn's win as a genuine protest by the voters who care about Labour, for it to return to its grass roots and that has constantly been ignored by the majority of the MPs who cannot accept Corbyn's victory and therefore are not going to listen to the people they supposedly represent.
Whatever accusations are made at Momentum or at Labour, then as many accusations have to be levelled at the rest of the PLP for their own Machiavellian schemes, acted out in their own interests and with scant disregard to the enormous amounts of people who have started to follow Corbyn's beliefs.
Honestly? I think what he's doing will ultimately be destructive, but unfortunately if he acquiesces or is forced out of the party by High Courts and breaches of democracy then the party will also destroy itself, because whoever replaces Corbyn will be seen to have won it in a bloody coup, in an undemocratic fashion that will alienate a large percentage of their core vote. Lose/Lose.
If I was Corbyn faced with hostility from all sides, I would do one of two things. I'd either come out fighting - properly. And I'd start with the press; I wouldn't pander to their whims and when I'm asked pointless personality or personal questions, I would simply turn it round and ask them why they're asking unimportant questions when they should be focusing on all the things that the public should be made aware of. Since he's shown no inclination to be anything but frosty, then the other option would be to sit down with Tom Watson and try to work out a logical successor, who can in some way continue to move Labour back towards its roots as a socialist party rather than a pink Tory party, while offering proper opposition and continuing to attract the people that Jeremy has so far recruited into the fold. Because Owen Smith isn't that man; he's a faceless bureaucrat with a questionable history who to anyone with half a brain sees a token candidate put up to do as much damage as possible.
What I'd like to see is for the 150 plus MPs who are so disillusioned with Corbyn to decide to break away - which is what they want to do but with the Labour name as their own - and form another political party; force 150+ by-elections and see how well they all do. It may well force the UK into looking at socialist coalitions as the way forward to defeat the Tories, or it might simply spell out to these 150+ MPs just how out of touch with their voters they really are. Perhaps this is what is needed; to make the comfortable 'elite' MPs realise that we put them there and therefore they should be representing us and not their own self-interests. The problem with this is MPs are insecure creatures at the best of times; they'd rather try an undemocratic route than an honest plebiscite. Destroy and rebuild from within, because the public has a short memory. Unfortunately betrayal tends to root itself deep.
Like right wing leaning people, I tend to stick with my 'tribe' and therefore spend a lot of time preaching to the converted and have probably been labelled a 'loony leftie' by many of my more moderate friends and relatives, who sometimes view my politics as 'harmful' and 'non-negotiable', but I hope they will at least recognise my commitment to my beliefs. However, in this very narcissistic world we live in now, I can't help but want to get a big massive trumpet out and start blowing it loudly from the hills.
Talking to an equally 'radical' friend the other night, I made the rather modest (highly unusual for me) statement that I must be some kind of prophet. After the hilarity of the statement dissipated, I quantified my statement: Since I resurrected this blog last year, I've focused a lot on the Brexit issue and the turmoil in British politics. I've made lots of forecasts, based on my feelings rather than the biased press and media, and an incredibly huge amount of them have come true. With hindsight, some of the observations I made seem more lucid and realistic now than they possibly did when I was sounding like a conspiracy theorist on steroids and many of the things I said weren't echoed in the press - ever; many of the questions I asked ended up being asked when it was too late and while I have no doubt many other bloggers sensed the real feeling around the country, I didn't see the politicians, the media and all of their assorted bandwagons have the same kind of handle on the 'mood' as I did from dog walks, work and general conversations with people.
How can someone so politically naive, with no formal qualifications in the subject, and an interest generated more through suspicion than through faith in politicians have got it right so many times and yet people who get paid loads of money failed to see, or more importantly, listen to the people outside of their front doors? Is his more evidence of a media agenda or are these people simply not as astute, as expert, as we like to believe?
Politicians really need to have a good hard look, not just at themselves but at the 60-odd million people living here (there's that famous altruism shining through). If nothing else people have made it clear that they no longer trust politicians of any kind - the left despise the right and vice versa and there hasn't really ever been a middle ground, despite whatever heights the Libdems reached, all that was was the first signs of a disgruntled nations starting to grow tired of the same old same old.
Look at Farage. Honestly, I'm not as obsessed with the man in real life, but in political terms I consider him to have had more impact on a nation than very few politicians in the last 50 years, possibly Thatcher being the exception. The incredible thing about him is his ability to turn repeated failures into some kind of perverse victory (all aided and abetted by our hard right media); like some kind of carcinogenic Eddie the Eagle his resilience is a thing to behold; Oswald Moseley probably would have seen him as a future PM. Yet there is no arguing with how he has single-handedly turned UKIP into the third largest party in the country (by vote share).
The real shame of UKIP is they have inadvertently tapped into the general malaise of the average working man, something one of the other parties should have done - knowingly. Historically this is probably totally inaccurate, but UKIP appeared to be a semi-respectable face of British Nationalism when it started; almost like they realised there was a hot bed of xenophobes and casual racists out there all ignorant enough to want to blame anything foreign for their ills and woes. The problem is, that party is a disorganised shambles, even compared to the Labour Party, if they had a collective brain they could be very dangerous.
In 2001, a good friend of mine said to me in a pub in Nottingham, "Do you know what we should do? We should join the Conservative Party." I stared at him in utter disbelief. "No, wait, hear me out. They are such a disorganised rabble at the moment that anyone with a half decent idea can walk into that party and change it. Until they get proper people running it again they'll never get elected." Obviously we never joined and even if we had, I'm sure there was someone somewhere in CCO planning a future that didn't involve two 'socialist' men just about to turn 40; but the point is UKIP by and large seems like a party with no real reason to exist, except maybe to steal votes from the disgruntled, diluting voter share even more and giving the Tories an easier path to complete dominance. What better way to win an election than by duping former die-hard Labour voters to vote for a party that politically is further to the right than the party they claim to despise. Oh the irony. The point is with proper 21st century politicians running it, UKIP could be a serious threat. We should be thankful for small mercies.
I've often heard the phrase 'the government is out of touch with its people' and, to be honest, I've often felt that was a throwaway comment; I've never felt governments have ever really been in touch with the people. However, for the first time in my 50-odd years, I believe that statement is more pertinent now than ever before, except it isn't the government who is out of touch, it's the entire political machine. Do you know why Jeremy Corbyn is probably perceived as more of a threat to the status quo than him just being a mad Trot? Because he did something last year that has stopped happening with our politicians - he went out and talked to people. I remember general elections when I was growing up and right up until about 2007 with politicians doing what we want them to, engaging with the voters, on doorsteps, at rallies, on market squares, with soapbox in hand; listening to the people and trying to reflect that in their politics. But something happened and media took over and more and more people grew to dislike politicians and it was no longer safe for many politicians to walk the streets of their constituencies; the more Westminster lost touch with the real people, the more real people grew to hate them.
The death of Jo Cox was systematic of what has happened and how people are no longer connected to their representatives, even the ones like Cox who was more engaging than others. Obviously this incident isn't going to have the MPs flooding onto the streets to gauge opinion and engage with their voters and Cox's death might also have signalled the death of any true links MPs will have to local non-political communities. There is now no way people aren't going to view them all as aloof, privileged and not reflecting what they'd like to believe.
Former Labour MP for Northampton South and now Green councillor for the County Council, Tony Clarke, won his seat in 1997, despite traditionally it always being a Tory seat, because he got out and knocked on doors, talked to people, won over their trust, even if they weren't Labour voters and he was regarded as the left of a then newly-modernised and centre New Labour. Yet, he used the swell of opinion mixed with actual hard work to win his seat and then just about retain it later. That doesn't happen any more or if it does prospective MPs and incumbents tend to pick and choose the areas they canvas - therefore are probably preaching to the converted and those who will probably vote anyhow.
The sad thing is that my forecasts weren't intended to be scaremongering, they were intended to highlight what might or would probably happen, from my perspective, and almost as if I scripted it personally, everything from Cameron to Johnson to Eagle's resignations to the economic instability has come true; even my reluctance to believe that Leave would probably win in the two weeks leading up to the vote...
So what does the self-proclaimed new guru of political forecasting believe will happen now? Well, returning to my radical friend and our sage-like weekly conversations about the state of the nation; he believes Theresa May should call a general election in November, because if Labour is in civil war and looking totally unelectable, then she'd be stupid not to. My response to that is 'too risky'. The media might be telling us one thing, and for sure Labour is valiantly trying to destroy itself, but I think there's a definite feeling within the Tory party that people don't want more politics thrust upon them and now we've had one monumental protest vote - with repercussions for decades likely - in this decade of crazy shit happening, the last thing is for a cocky Tory party to go back to the country and end up being in a coalition again. Or worse still, a turn out of less than 40% would not make any mandate legitimate in the majority's eyes. Tories want a few years of crisis managing the economy and trying to be as anodyne as possible to the masses.
On Thursday of last week, I was convinced that the Labour Party coup was going to blow itself out and some kind of uneasy truce will have been found that could have at least taken the party forward, but sadly events escalated again and the civil war is actually getting uglier and unbelievably harmful to democracy in this country. I said in another blog that this is no longer a battle to oust Corbyn but a movement to shut down his wing of the party. The PLP want the left eradicated from the party completely, and not because they've read the mood of the public and seen the future, but because they've seen the future and their careers are at stake.
So technically speaking, May doesn't need to call an election because, at the moment, the Tories have no effective opposition; their majority might as well be 100.
As a Corbyn supporter, how do I feel about what has been happening? This was a question I was asked just the other day and my answer was tempered by my current bemusement with life in general. This is how I see it; a year ago, feeling wounded by a really disappointing election campaign with a leader less electable than Neil Kinnock and left wondering just what the Labour had to do to make itself more popular than a government that was very unpopular, but still won? Despite my interest in politics, I didn't know Jeremy Corbyn from a hole in the ground and like many people indoctrinated by the media, I thought he was the sacrificial left-wing lamb to show some range of democracy in a relatively anodyne leadership contest. Then, like many others, I started to see this groundswell of support for a reasonable man, unruffled by the hyperbole of 21st century politics, talking sense in a crazy political world. The opposition towards him started before he even won and I forecast the tensions ahead of him, without realising just how low it could sink.
I cannot deny Corbyn represents a wing of the Labour Party that the establishment dislikes and is prone to being labelled extremists and like the far right, the extreme left attracts its own kind of loonies. I saw Corbyn's win as a genuine protest by the voters who care about Labour, for it to return to its grass roots and that has constantly been ignored by the majority of the MPs who cannot accept Corbyn's victory and therefore are not going to listen to the people they supposedly represent.
Whatever accusations are made at Momentum or at Labour, then as many accusations have to be levelled at the rest of the PLP for their own Machiavellian schemes, acted out in their own interests and with scant disregard to the enormous amounts of people who have started to follow Corbyn's beliefs.
Honestly? I think what he's doing will ultimately be destructive, but unfortunately if he acquiesces or is forced out of the party by High Courts and breaches of democracy then the party will also destroy itself, because whoever replaces Corbyn will be seen to have won it in a bloody coup, in an undemocratic fashion that will alienate a large percentage of their core vote. Lose/Lose.
If I was Corbyn faced with hostility from all sides, I would do one of two things. I'd either come out fighting - properly. And I'd start with the press; I wouldn't pander to their whims and when I'm asked pointless personality or personal questions, I would simply turn it round and ask them why they're asking unimportant questions when they should be focusing on all the things that the public should be made aware of. Since he's shown no inclination to be anything but frosty, then the other option would be to sit down with Tom Watson and try to work out a logical successor, who can in some way continue to move Labour back towards its roots as a socialist party rather than a pink Tory party, while offering proper opposition and continuing to attract the people that Jeremy has so far recruited into the fold. Because Owen Smith isn't that man; he's a faceless bureaucrat with a questionable history who to anyone with half a brain sees a token candidate put up to do as much damage as possible.
What I'd like to see is for the 150 plus MPs who are so disillusioned with Corbyn to decide to break away - which is what they want to do but with the Labour name as their own - and form another political party; force 150+ by-elections and see how well they all do. It may well force the UK into looking at socialist coalitions as the way forward to defeat the Tories, or it might simply spell out to these 150+ MPs just how out of touch with their voters they really are. Perhaps this is what is needed; to make the comfortable 'elite' MPs realise that we put them there and therefore they should be representing us and not their own self-interests. The problem with this is MPs are insecure creatures at the best of times; they'd rather try an undemocratic route than an honest plebiscite. Destroy and rebuild from within, because the public has a short memory. Unfortunately betrayal tends to root itself deep.
Wednesday, 13 July 2016
The United Kingdom Social Democracy Alliance
Margaret Thatcher began a systematic destruction of the left wing of politics by adopting an 'art of war' strategy based on divide and conquer. She didn't do it because she feared them, she did it because she felt the country would be better off without them. The new country she was building didn't need pinko-lefties obfuscating the charge of capitalism and the free market. She viewed the left as nothing more than a tick in the fur, but one that allowed to bury itself would cause unrest, especially among those who viewed her as extreme.
The division of Labour and the forming of the SDP was the first of what would end up being more covert than overt. The rise of the Green Party, the Scottish National Party, Plaid Cymru and independents would further erode the left's vote. The Tories saw the left as easily divisible, while always being able to keep itself together through the common bond of greed. If you have greed, you have a common ground; if you have understanding and fairness at your root, you will always have disagreements with like-minded people over the most trivial of matters. Once the right had the press on their side, it became a fait accompli.
The Labour Party of the 21st Century - current leader excepted - would have Ted Heath's government concerned about radicalism and a lack of compassion. This is how far left wing politics has changed in the UK; where a man is judged on his choices and beliefs rather than his ability to look statesman-like, in a party that has shown, quite deliberately, how little it cares for the people of this country at a time when it was needed the most.
Take Scotland as an example. The press will have you think that Labour's destruction was down to bad choices in the referendum up there, but the truth is the SNP - not historically as left wing as Labour - stole the ground, offered the Labour voters of Scotland a manifesto that seemed more 'Labour' than their party of choice and it was always going to end badly for 'Red' Scotland. Oddly enough, the same thing, in reverse, happened in England, with UKIP conning their way into Labour heartlands through tapping into base human emotions rather than common sense and because the message sent out by Labour no longer appeals to their Northern core of older voters, they have to think outside of the box. Corbyn is doing that, despite his years, while the PLP tries in vain, it seems, to try and remain stuck in an anachronistic political elite that no longer listens to it's public.
Labour needs to rethink the country. It can no longer appeal to half of it, and the other half are fragmented, disenfranchised and disillusioned with politics. The Tory Party will always motivate their voters, unless they really are harmful and toxic and need a rest, so the only way for Labour to unite itself is to unite all the left wing parties in a rainbow coalition that allows for the one thing that has eluded the left for so long - the thing that keeps the Tories together, despite their deep divisions: compromise.
A Party for Britain would compromise Labour, the SNP, Plaid Cymru, the left-leaning Northern Ireland SDLP, the Green Party, possibly even the Liberals and any independent, centre or left-leaning MPs. As the UK will no longer be part of the EU, they would fight for the rights of the UK and not the individual with lots of personal interest. Devolutionary deals could be cut; specific powers could be allowed, while coming together, in parliament, to work as a power to ensure fairness, tempered with business concerns and the free allowance of aspiration to dominate the market, without fear of tax penalties or desire to work elsewhere is countered. Perhaps even ministerial posts held by coalition committee, rather than a single jurisdiction? A vision for a fairer society, while not penalising those who have paid enough, but also not encouraging business to look elsewhere for bases of operation. Social democracy that has allowed some (not all by any means) of our European neighbours to look considerably more humane in their overall treatment of their citizens (indigenous or not).
The Tories and the press used the idea of a Labour/SNP coalition as being bad for Britain, but now that Britain is isolated, surely the most logical thing is for the four countries in the kingdom to unite and run Britain together. The old arguments are obsolete, especially if it was sold to the public from the off as the way forward for Britain. If they worked together to ensure socialist victories in marginal seats actually makes sense - think about it, even if you're a Tory/UKipper, A (Tory) MP is elected with a 5,000 majority, but the combined vote of the (left) other parties is 3,000 more than the elected which suggests quite emphatically that the MP doesn't represent the views of the majority of his/her constituents - the fairness of FPTP also reflects the unfairness in it. Convince the voters that a Green or LibDem vote is as good as voting for their chosen party if they live in a place where their party stands zero chance of retaining its deposit.
Or...
The left remain divided over petty differences and allow the elite to asset-strip the country, penalise the people and ignore the pleas for fairness. It has to be time for the left to burn their hair shirts and work together to stop the rise of neo-liberalism.
The division of Labour and the forming of the SDP was the first of what would end up being more covert than overt. The rise of the Green Party, the Scottish National Party, Plaid Cymru and independents would further erode the left's vote. The Tories saw the left as easily divisible, while always being able to keep itself together through the common bond of greed. If you have greed, you have a common ground; if you have understanding and fairness at your root, you will always have disagreements with like-minded people over the most trivial of matters. Once the right had the press on their side, it became a fait accompli.
The Labour Party of the 21st Century - current leader excepted - would have Ted Heath's government concerned about radicalism and a lack of compassion. This is how far left wing politics has changed in the UK; where a man is judged on his choices and beliefs rather than his ability to look statesman-like, in a party that has shown, quite deliberately, how little it cares for the people of this country at a time when it was needed the most.
Take Scotland as an example. The press will have you think that Labour's destruction was down to bad choices in the referendum up there, but the truth is the SNP - not historically as left wing as Labour - stole the ground, offered the Labour voters of Scotland a manifesto that seemed more 'Labour' than their party of choice and it was always going to end badly for 'Red' Scotland. Oddly enough, the same thing, in reverse, happened in England, with UKIP conning their way into Labour heartlands through tapping into base human emotions rather than common sense and because the message sent out by Labour no longer appeals to their Northern core of older voters, they have to think outside of the box. Corbyn is doing that, despite his years, while the PLP tries in vain, it seems, to try and remain stuck in an anachronistic political elite that no longer listens to it's public.
Labour needs to rethink the country. It can no longer appeal to half of it, and the other half are fragmented, disenfranchised and disillusioned with politics. The Tory Party will always motivate their voters, unless they really are harmful and toxic and need a rest, so the only way for Labour to unite itself is to unite all the left wing parties in a rainbow coalition that allows for the one thing that has eluded the left for so long - the thing that keeps the Tories together, despite their deep divisions: compromise.
A Party for Britain would compromise Labour, the SNP, Plaid Cymru, the left-leaning Northern Ireland SDLP, the Green Party, possibly even the Liberals and any independent, centre or left-leaning MPs. As the UK will no longer be part of the EU, they would fight for the rights of the UK and not the individual with lots of personal interest. Devolutionary deals could be cut; specific powers could be allowed, while coming together, in parliament, to work as a power to ensure fairness, tempered with business concerns and the free allowance of aspiration to dominate the market, without fear of tax penalties or desire to work elsewhere is countered. Perhaps even ministerial posts held by coalition committee, rather than a single jurisdiction? A vision for a fairer society, while not penalising those who have paid enough, but also not encouraging business to look elsewhere for bases of operation. Social democracy that has allowed some (not all by any means) of our European neighbours to look considerably more humane in their overall treatment of their citizens (indigenous or not).
The Tories and the press used the idea of a Labour/SNP coalition as being bad for Britain, but now that Britain is isolated, surely the most logical thing is for the four countries in the kingdom to unite and run Britain together. The old arguments are obsolete, especially if it was sold to the public from the off as the way forward for Britain. If they worked together to ensure socialist victories in marginal seats actually makes sense - think about it, even if you're a Tory/UKipper, A (Tory) MP is elected with a 5,000 majority, but the combined vote of the (left) other parties is 3,000 more than the elected which suggests quite emphatically that the MP doesn't represent the views of the majority of his/her constituents - the fairness of FPTP also reflects the unfairness in it. Convince the voters that a Green or LibDem vote is as good as voting for their chosen party if they live in a place where their party stands zero chance of retaining its deposit.
Or...
The left remain divided over petty differences and allow the elite to asset-strip the country, penalise the people and ignore the pleas for fairness. It has to be time for the left to burn their hair shirts and work together to stop the rise of neo-liberalism.
Thursday, 30 June 2016
The Young or the Dead?
I feel a little like a 19th century maiden aunt giving a young niece advice on how to have really great dirty, sweaty sex, but in many ways that is okay because the people I'm appealing to are sometimes blinded by love and high sugar content food and drink.
The old, the disaffected, the disenfranchised and the ignorant - but mainly the old - have plunged the youth of this country into a situation at least 76% of those that voted didn't want and while, in reality, the majority of them will dismiss the vote on a minute-by-minute basis, the youth of this country with half a brain will know that there is now an even bigger hurdle in front of them than they could ever have imagined. For some young people in this country there is nothing but covert rebellion, weed, sex and the same slog their parents and grandparents suffered and regardless of the social and educational reasons, a large part of it is down to parents looking at their children like they are some kind of bizarre investment and wondering when that huge money pit is either going to pay back some of the money spent on them or bugger off the family payroll.
I've worked with some unbelievably intelligent kids whose lives are fait accomplis - their fathers have stated, quite categorically that work is the way forward, none of this going to college and bettering yourself nonsense. Trying to convince these kids they should fight for their future is a cross between trying to convince a racist they should have voted remain and a real fight - you'd have more chance donning a Moses costume and trying to convince the Red Sea to part. I have friends in Corby who can point out walking human tragedies around that town - people who, had they been looked after properly by our governments, could have become someone good - people who contribute. Yes, these people didn't want whatever opportunities were pushed their way, but on estates in Corby anything coming from Westminster is viewed with suspicion and therefore anything passed down by local government has the same stigma attached; plus the children of people with nothing are indoctrinated by the spite their parents hold for the establishment.
The problem is in these urban ghettos, of which Corby and every other town in Northants (and all over the country) also have people who simply do not believe that politicians are even aware of them and whenever they do fall on their radar it's to try and make their lives harder - and frankly, who can blame them. It simply doesn't matter what you say to some people, prove to them or give them examples of why, people think governments are there to shaft us - a necessary evil.
I've met people who have conveyed to me that they truly believe this is Purgatory; that living here and now is a punishment for a previous life's indiscretions. I've met more people who have become increasingly paranoid about everything and I'm seeing scary levels of intolerance that would have been frowned upon ten years ago. The sad truth is people are ignorant because influence exists everywhere and in austere times negative influence resonates more.
The people affected by negative influence the most are the elderly and what the elderly did last Thursday was stick a massive two fingers up at their children, their grandchildren and their future generations. They weren't influenced by the fact they could be screwing up everything they worked hard for and some of them won't care. Both parties operated Project Fear, the Leave campaign scared the OAPs more while simultaneously tweaking the nostalgia gland.
What we now need is a brighter future, because for 48% of the population it looks bleaker than a landslide UKip General Election victory and what everyone seems to have forgotten about are all those kids in schools and apprenticeships who had absolutely no say whatsoever in their futures. Every 'child' under 18 on June 22nd didn't have representation and how many of them would have been subjected to their parents' or grandparents' racist invective? Many of them, living in a completely multi-cultural world, dismiss it, but others, like the kid who was resigned to leaving school at 16 and getting a job, will perpetuate it.
Politics was something reserved for 6th form when I was at school and while schools today have some politics in their curriculum, the nature of it and the passions it stirs, especially amongst left leaning teachers means it's more like a mechanics manual than a creative writing class. This is completely wrong.
I believe that politics is something that we are exposed to every day - we simply can't avoid it, yet the majority of us systematically blank it from our minds. We try not to align the two because for some of us it really is too difficult to reconcile. But it is a fact, from your shopping to your use of parks you are using politics, you are part of politics, you are aiding the economy to allow you to relax in the park. Obviously, it is a lot more complicated than that, but that pretty much sums it up. If you lived in a world inhabited by 150,000 people on a planet the size of Northampton, it might be as simple as that. Every child from the moment they are born - the NHS - to the moment they walk out of school - and onto JSA - is, in many ways, affected by politics more than you or I and yet they have no voice, because of politics.
I'm not suggesting that any child under the age of twelve should be forced to suffer 'lessons' about politics, but once a child enters Year 9 they should get a mandatory one lesson a week, rising to two in Year 11. Before you start arguing about bias, just remember that kids are subject to political bias whenever there's an election on, whenever something happens that effects their parents. Whenever something unique like a referendum happens, so they're not going to be exposed to anything worse than they see at home; but that isn't really a starter here. My little experience in education saw something I really didn't expect - Conservative teachers; there might not be that many, but they exist. If schools have to or chose to put Politics on their curriculum then they employ politically diverse teachers and if that seems a bit radical, think of it this way - kids share everything with each other and now more than when I was at school because of electronic devices and social networks; teachers sharing personal beliefs is always something special, it forms bonds, and more importantly kids listen to 'secrets' with all ears; if they think they're sharing something it sticks and it focuses minds much better than pawing over books. Politics should be about discussion, debate and demystification as well as how and why it works and what it does for us.
I was asked once by a young guy why we paid taxes. I thought it was a weird question until he quantified it. We pay Council Tax, we pay VAT, we pay fuel tax, we pay road tax, if people die they pay inheritance tax, we pay taxes on house purchases, we have to buy a TV license, and then there's pensions and National Insurance, taxes on fags and booze, we even buy lottery tickets, where does all of this money go and then you have income tax, which is the biggest chunk of the lot. I suddenly realised that young people simply don't understand and that's because they are not educated about it. We send our kids to school and they leave and are thrown in the deep end without adequate preparation. This is a society that will allow any 16 year old to have a baby, but not vote until they're 18. If you didn't understand how society worked you'd probably wonder why we leave our kids so under-prepared and even if you do understand it...
Evil politicians might want less people to be interested, because lower turn outs mean bigger chances of winning. If compulsory voting is not on or ever likely to be on the agenda then we have to start educating our kids about politics, even if it bores the shit out of them. The daughter of an old friend recently had a lesson at school - she's Year 11 - and it was about council taxes, pension schemes, insurances and being aware that planning for the future is something school leavers should really be thinking about - not all the time, because knowledge is not necessarily power, but it does remove the huge amounts of anger and frustration exhibited by the youth when faced with such trials as benefits, rent agreements and single living. Schools are kind of gearing up kids to be at home now, focusing on careers again but not teaching kids about the perils that face them, especially if they have radical parents; and I mean 'radical' in the term they view their children as earners rather than learners.
Stop perpetuating myths, urban legends and prejudice by allowing them to view their parents' opinions with objectivity; if we continue the way we're going huge swathes of the country won't even bother to vote and less and less people will feel compelled to venture into politics and it will become like it was in the 19th century, lots of rich and privileged people screwing you down and the people feeling helpless, worthless and alienated. If you are a parent and you value your kids' futures, then you should start to encourage them to be interested. It's kind of a duty if we want fairer representation in the future, when many of us will have retired and will be worrying about pensions, houses, food and our limited futures.
Lower the voting age to 16, or raise all legal ages to 17; at 15 a kid is facing at least three years of education ahead, but 16 and 17 year-olds face four or five years of not having a say in their future and by the time they do they're not interested. Get schools to promote student councils, that have to be run to include all, and that means some of the dodgy kids and even some from SEN or the disenfranchised - give them a voice and some responsibility and watch them shine and more importantly watch them assert positive peer pressure. You don't have to radicalise students to get them interested in the future of their country, you just have to make them think (and know) they will have a voice.
It's time to engage and involve the young in tomorrow.
The old, the disaffected, the disenfranchised and the ignorant - but mainly the old - have plunged the youth of this country into a situation at least 76% of those that voted didn't want and while, in reality, the majority of them will dismiss the vote on a minute-by-minute basis, the youth of this country with half a brain will know that there is now an even bigger hurdle in front of them than they could ever have imagined. For some young people in this country there is nothing but covert rebellion, weed, sex and the same slog their parents and grandparents suffered and regardless of the social and educational reasons, a large part of it is down to parents looking at their children like they are some kind of bizarre investment and wondering when that huge money pit is either going to pay back some of the money spent on them or bugger off the family payroll.
I've worked with some unbelievably intelligent kids whose lives are fait accomplis - their fathers have stated, quite categorically that work is the way forward, none of this going to college and bettering yourself nonsense. Trying to convince these kids they should fight for their future is a cross between trying to convince a racist they should have voted remain and a real fight - you'd have more chance donning a Moses costume and trying to convince the Red Sea to part. I have friends in Corby who can point out walking human tragedies around that town - people who, had they been looked after properly by our governments, could have become someone good - people who contribute. Yes, these people didn't want whatever opportunities were pushed their way, but on estates in Corby anything coming from Westminster is viewed with suspicion and therefore anything passed down by local government has the same stigma attached; plus the children of people with nothing are indoctrinated by the spite their parents hold for the establishment.
The problem is in these urban ghettos, of which Corby and every other town in Northants (and all over the country) also have people who simply do not believe that politicians are even aware of them and whenever they do fall on their radar it's to try and make their lives harder - and frankly, who can blame them. It simply doesn't matter what you say to some people, prove to them or give them examples of why, people think governments are there to shaft us - a necessary evil.
I've met people who have conveyed to me that they truly believe this is Purgatory; that living here and now is a punishment for a previous life's indiscretions. I've met more people who have become increasingly paranoid about everything and I'm seeing scary levels of intolerance that would have been frowned upon ten years ago. The sad truth is people are ignorant because influence exists everywhere and in austere times negative influence resonates more.
The people affected by negative influence the most are the elderly and what the elderly did last Thursday was stick a massive two fingers up at their children, their grandchildren and their future generations. They weren't influenced by the fact they could be screwing up everything they worked hard for and some of them won't care. Both parties operated Project Fear, the Leave campaign scared the OAPs more while simultaneously tweaking the nostalgia gland.
What we now need is a brighter future, because for 48% of the population it looks bleaker than a landslide UKip General Election victory and what everyone seems to have forgotten about are all those kids in schools and apprenticeships who had absolutely no say whatsoever in their futures. Every 'child' under 18 on June 22nd didn't have representation and how many of them would have been subjected to their parents' or grandparents' racist invective? Many of them, living in a completely multi-cultural world, dismiss it, but others, like the kid who was resigned to leaving school at 16 and getting a job, will perpetuate it.
Politics was something reserved for 6th form when I was at school and while schools today have some politics in their curriculum, the nature of it and the passions it stirs, especially amongst left leaning teachers means it's more like a mechanics manual than a creative writing class. This is completely wrong.
I believe that politics is something that we are exposed to every day - we simply can't avoid it, yet the majority of us systematically blank it from our minds. We try not to align the two because for some of us it really is too difficult to reconcile. But it is a fact, from your shopping to your use of parks you are using politics, you are part of politics, you are aiding the economy to allow you to relax in the park. Obviously, it is a lot more complicated than that, but that pretty much sums it up. If you lived in a world inhabited by 150,000 people on a planet the size of Northampton, it might be as simple as that. Every child from the moment they are born - the NHS - to the moment they walk out of school - and onto JSA - is, in many ways, affected by politics more than you or I and yet they have no voice, because of politics.
I'm not suggesting that any child under the age of twelve should be forced to suffer 'lessons' about politics, but once a child enters Year 9 they should get a mandatory one lesson a week, rising to two in Year 11. Before you start arguing about bias, just remember that kids are subject to political bias whenever there's an election on, whenever something happens that effects their parents. Whenever something unique like a referendum happens, so they're not going to be exposed to anything worse than they see at home; but that isn't really a starter here. My little experience in education saw something I really didn't expect - Conservative teachers; there might not be that many, but they exist. If schools have to or chose to put Politics on their curriculum then they employ politically diverse teachers and if that seems a bit radical, think of it this way - kids share everything with each other and now more than when I was at school because of electronic devices and social networks; teachers sharing personal beliefs is always something special, it forms bonds, and more importantly kids listen to 'secrets' with all ears; if they think they're sharing something it sticks and it focuses minds much better than pawing over books. Politics should be about discussion, debate and demystification as well as how and why it works and what it does for us.
I was asked once by a young guy why we paid taxes. I thought it was a weird question until he quantified it. We pay Council Tax, we pay VAT, we pay fuel tax, we pay road tax, if people die they pay inheritance tax, we pay taxes on house purchases, we have to buy a TV license, and then there's pensions and National Insurance, taxes on fags and booze, we even buy lottery tickets, where does all of this money go and then you have income tax, which is the biggest chunk of the lot. I suddenly realised that young people simply don't understand and that's because they are not educated about it. We send our kids to school and they leave and are thrown in the deep end without adequate preparation. This is a society that will allow any 16 year old to have a baby, but not vote until they're 18. If you didn't understand how society worked you'd probably wonder why we leave our kids so under-prepared and even if you do understand it...
Evil politicians might want less people to be interested, because lower turn outs mean bigger chances of winning. If compulsory voting is not on or ever likely to be on the agenda then we have to start educating our kids about politics, even if it bores the shit out of them. The daughter of an old friend recently had a lesson at school - she's Year 11 - and it was about council taxes, pension schemes, insurances and being aware that planning for the future is something school leavers should really be thinking about - not all the time, because knowledge is not necessarily power, but it does remove the huge amounts of anger and frustration exhibited by the youth when faced with such trials as benefits, rent agreements and single living. Schools are kind of gearing up kids to be at home now, focusing on careers again but not teaching kids about the perils that face them, especially if they have radical parents; and I mean 'radical' in the term they view their children as earners rather than learners.
Stop perpetuating myths, urban legends and prejudice by allowing them to view their parents' opinions with objectivity; if we continue the way we're going huge swathes of the country won't even bother to vote and less and less people will feel compelled to venture into politics and it will become like it was in the 19th century, lots of rich and privileged people screwing you down and the people feeling helpless, worthless and alienated. If you are a parent and you value your kids' futures, then you should start to encourage them to be interested. It's kind of a duty if we want fairer representation in the future, when many of us will have retired and will be worrying about pensions, houses, food and our limited futures.
Lower the voting age to 16, or raise all legal ages to 17; at 15 a kid is facing at least three years of education ahead, but 16 and 17 year-olds face four or five years of not having a say in their future and by the time they do they're not interested. Get schools to promote student councils, that have to be run to include all, and that means some of the dodgy kids and even some from SEN or the disenfranchised - give them a voice and some responsibility and watch them shine and more importantly watch them assert positive peer pressure. You don't have to radicalise students to get them interested in the future of their country, you just have to make them think (and know) they will have a voice.
It's time to engage and involve the young in tomorrow.
Sunday, 29 May 2016
The Death of the Conservatives
Someone I know made an astute comment in response to a political argument. It was that the Conservative government voted to accept the last George Osborne budget (despite the fallout, the resignations and the almost-rebellion), it sailed through parliament and yet now nearly half of them are calling Gideon O, amongst other things, an incompetent charlatan. If we can draw any conclusions about this EU referendum it is quite clear - there is massive division in the Tory party, one that has existed for years simmering away in the background, but now has come to a angry and pus-filled head.
I've said before that the left's worst enemy is its ability to fracture and split into factions, thus ultimately diluting their vote; while the Tories disagree with each other over the same amount of things, but money keeps them united and I really don't mean that in a nasty way; political parties need unity and a strong bond to keep them together - Labour should have social justice at its core; the Tories should have money, it's why people, misguidedly, trust them with the economy and why a lot of people vote for them; people think they will be better off under a Tory government and are more likely to trust them if measures such as austerity happen. They are, after all, the elite of British society and are moneyed people.
Take the EU referendum as a yardstick: half the Tory party are calling the other half liars and vice versa; both of them know pretty much the real cost of leaving the EU - they're in government and have access to every expert, bit of data and economic forecast imaginable; so one of them is deliberately lying, or both of them are, but one thing is certain, both of them are not telling the truth.
So how can you trust them to run your country whether we're in the EU or not?
Forget what you're voting for, who you're voting against and whatever flimsy or concrete reason you have for not voting, the noisy backbench Tories, the ones there to keep schtum and nod and patronise and vote for whatever they're told to are now getting noisier and Cameron's future is being called into question (and, honestly, if I could forecast this 6 months ago, just how politically astute are our media's political reporters?) and this is a man who led them to their first majority government since 1992. We all know politicians, in general, are self-serving bastards where principles are no longer a pre-requisite for the job, but look at it at the moment: Tory eating Tory over Europe; never-say-die Blairites constantly stirring up unhelpful background noise for Jeremy Corbyn; the press which is so right wing that it'll pursue any agenda that it thinks will keep readers happy; there are even rumblings in Scotland that the SNP are facing a tough time because they are having to implement a Scots-lite version of austerity, because they're overspending (which I also find amazing didn't make it into English papers in any great way).
Unity in politics no longer exists.
Let me really generalise and give you a silly, but relevant, example: when I were a lad there was maybe seven or eight genres of music; soul, rock, c&w, pop, classical, jazz and folk - there were subdivisions of these, but they were grouped under one label. Forty years later there are maybe the same amount of 'genres' but the music that exists within them is far more diverse and unusual than you could have imagined; some of those sub-genres are extremely popular and might even be, at a certain point, more popular than the genre they exist under, while others mix and match, mash-up and flirt and could be labelled many rather than one. This is politics now - different versions of the original ideology existing under an umbrella that isn't big enough to contain them.
The man in charge of the Commons, John Bercow, MP for Buckingham is regarded by some (in his own Tory party) to be more left of centre than a third of all Labour MPs. I've heard apocryphal stories that he was put forward for the Speaker's job because the Tory party didn't like their own version of Dennis Skinner speaking his mind rather than the party line. Michael Gove used to be a shop steward for the NUT and is now considered to be on the hard right of the party (hard right in my language equates to 'scary').
There is apparently this kind of division within the Tory party: Pro Europe 15%, Ambivalent Europe 35% and Anti-Europe 50% - this is a fundamental schism within the party because whatever the outcome of the referendum there could be 50% of a 'united' party in total disagreement with the other, still.
Just to balance this out, even without the media, old New Labour still finds a way, almost weekly, to stick the knife into current Labour, with the vile and dislikeable Tony Blair seemingly believing someone in the country gives a hoot what he thinks any more. It pains me to know that arguably the most successful Labour PM since Atlee is also as responsible for some of the nastiest, most corrupt and neo-Conservative decisions since Margaret Thatcher.
It's becoming obvious to those that notice - politicians like each other about as much as we like them.
Let's also get one thing very straight and clear - voter apathy is a boon in our current first-past-the-post voting system; the more you think governments do nothing for you the more likely you are to stay at home and watch Corrie. We can be governed by a party, which will claim to have 'the mandate of the people' despite only getting 32% of the vote share from a total turn out of 58% - my maths isn't brilliant, but that's something like 16 million out of 46 million eligible voters giving that mandate.
Think about that for a bit. My figures do stack up.
Two-thirds of the country hate politics. Our politicians disagree on more than they agree on. No one is right, no one is wrong. One thing is becoming obvious - we should elect officials to represent the good of the ENTIRE country, not the interests of their political party, personal wealth or to help their mates. The problem there is if you're one of those rare things, a politician with ethics and principles, you become a target for the right and they're only really supported by about a third of the country and you see my tail fast disappearing down my own throat?
I've said before that the left's worst enemy is its ability to fracture and split into factions, thus ultimately diluting their vote; while the Tories disagree with each other over the same amount of things, but money keeps them united and I really don't mean that in a nasty way; political parties need unity and a strong bond to keep them together - Labour should have social justice at its core; the Tories should have money, it's why people, misguidedly, trust them with the economy and why a lot of people vote for them; people think they will be better off under a Tory government and are more likely to trust them if measures such as austerity happen. They are, after all, the elite of British society and are moneyed people.
Take the EU referendum as a yardstick: half the Tory party are calling the other half liars and vice versa; both of them know pretty much the real cost of leaving the EU - they're in government and have access to every expert, bit of data and economic forecast imaginable; so one of them is deliberately lying, or both of them are, but one thing is certain, both of them are not telling the truth.
So how can you trust them to run your country whether we're in the EU or not?
Forget what you're voting for, who you're voting against and whatever flimsy or concrete reason you have for not voting, the noisy backbench Tories, the ones there to keep schtum and nod and patronise and vote for whatever they're told to are now getting noisier and Cameron's future is being called into question (and, honestly, if I could forecast this 6 months ago, just how politically astute are our media's political reporters?) and this is a man who led them to their first majority government since 1992. We all know politicians, in general, are self-serving bastards where principles are no longer a pre-requisite for the job, but look at it at the moment: Tory eating Tory over Europe; never-say-die Blairites constantly stirring up unhelpful background noise for Jeremy Corbyn; the press which is so right wing that it'll pursue any agenda that it thinks will keep readers happy; there are even rumblings in Scotland that the SNP are facing a tough time because they are having to implement a Scots-lite version of austerity, because they're overspending (which I also find amazing didn't make it into English papers in any great way).
Unity in politics no longer exists.
Let me really generalise and give you a silly, but relevant, example: when I were a lad there was maybe seven or eight genres of music; soul, rock, c&w, pop, classical, jazz and folk - there were subdivisions of these, but they were grouped under one label. Forty years later there are maybe the same amount of 'genres' but the music that exists within them is far more diverse and unusual than you could have imagined; some of those sub-genres are extremely popular and might even be, at a certain point, more popular than the genre they exist under, while others mix and match, mash-up and flirt and could be labelled many rather than one. This is politics now - different versions of the original ideology existing under an umbrella that isn't big enough to contain them.
The man in charge of the Commons, John Bercow, MP for Buckingham is regarded by some (in his own Tory party) to be more left of centre than a third of all Labour MPs. I've heard apocryphal stories that he was put forward for the Speaker's job because the Tory party didn't like their own version of Dennis Skinner speaking his mind rather than the party line. Michael Gove used to be a shop steward for the NUT and is now considered to be on the hard right of the party (hard right in my language equates to 'scary').
There is apparently this kind of division within the Tory party: Pro Europe 15%, Ambivalent Europe 35% and Anti-Europe 50% - this is a fundamental schism within the party because whatever the outcome of the referendum there could be 50% of a 'united' party in total disagreement with the other, still.
Just to balance this out, even without the media, old New Labour still finds a way, almost weekly, to stick the knife into current Labour, with the vile and dislikeable Tony Blair seemingly believing someone in the country gives a hoot what he thinks any more. It pains me to know that arguably the most successful Labour PM since Atlee is also as responsible for some of the nastiest, most corrupt and neo-Conservative decisions since Margaret Thatcher.
It's becoming obvious to those that notice - politicians like each other about as much as we like them.
Let's also get one thing very straight and clear - voter apathy is a boon in our current first-past-the-post voting system; the more you think governments do nothing for you the more likely you are to stay at home and watch Corrie. We can be governed by a party, which will claim to have 'the mandate of the people' despite only getting 32% of the vote share from a total turn out of 58% - my maths isn't brilliant, but that's something like 16 million out of 46 million eligible voters giving that mandate.
Think about that for a bit. My figures do stack up.
Two-thirds of the country hate politics. Our politicians disagree on more than they agree on. No one is right, no one is wrong. One thing is becoming obvious - we should elect officials to represent the good of the ENTIRE country, not the interests of their political party, personal wealth or to help their mates. The problem there is if you're one of those rare things, a politician with ethics and principles, you become a target for the right and they're only really supported by about a third of the country and you see my tail fast disappearing down my own throat?
Monday, 22 February 2016
Judging the Fancy Dress Costume Competition
We might have to save Dave's bacon...
It's not something that will sit well with people, especially people like me who have suffered from the austerity program, but the threat of something much worse looms.
If Britain votes to pull out of the EU, we'll end up with a far right wing led Tory party that will make Cameron and Osborne seem reasonable and almost benevolent. The reason we'll end up with that is not only will we be free of those pesky benefits of being in Europe, we'll also lose the PM and any chance of Gideon becoming the next PM. That looks like a brilliant idea; get rid of the Eton scumbags; except can you imagine a country run by Michael Gove, Theresa May and a PM who looks like a special needs albino dandelion and believe the welfare state is still far too bloated. Imagine a country without an NHS and the state pension abolished after a certain period, so that everyone in the country will either have to arrange a private pension or get nothing when they choose to retire, or never retire as the case will be.
That's probably where this Tory party will take us, but under Cameron and co that might not happen for another 10 years; under Boris, Gove and the wife of the 'owner' of G4S 'reforms' will happen much faster and anything that hasn't been privatised will be. This isn't me scaremongering, go and look at some of these people's speeches and their ideology, if you can be bothered, and see just how extreme some of them are.
I'll give you an example of how the world has changed in the last 15 years. Glenn Hoddle was sacked as England football team manager because his religious belief told him that disabled people could be sinners in a previous life. This was blown out of all proportion, Hoddle - a deeply religious man - was castigated by all sides and his career was effectively destroyed. The Tory party via their evil and Draconian Prove You Are Disabled charter is pretty much blaming the disabled for being disabled and charging their relatives with the sole responsibility of their care. In a world that should be civilised, people with limbs missing are being asked questions that suggest their inability to grow arms or legs back is their fault and not the government's or any of the 'tax' payers - which it isn't, but society does have a moral obligation to look after those who can't look after themselves, or are people suggesting we just leave the disabled to die in their own filth, ignored by people? Ian Duncan Smith would probably be called Hagbastard Thorngristle in a Dickens novel and be far more vile than any of Dickens's creations could ever have been.
The EU has protected us from the Tories persecuting everyone who doesn't have a chance. The only thing a vote to come out will do is allow them to 'legally' screw you over.
So, we need to support the man with a penchant for all things porcine; we need to keep him in power for a few more years at least. As abhorrent as that sounds, I'd rather have Dave than a seriously dangerous group of neo-Nazis that stand to his far right.
The sad thing about this is my own party should be strong and Corbyn should act like a PM - he might have, but we'll never see it. What Corbyn needs to do is hold Cameron to ransom; he needs to Francis Urquhart him and it might be Corbyn's honesty that prevents Labour from gaining much ground from this referendum.
Imagine what shocks it would cause if Jeremy stood up and said, "Do you know something, after much debate and 1000s of emails (from Rose, Nigel, Steve, Dawn...), I think Labour will side with the Brexit vote. We should leave the EU and go it alone." What it would do is totally galvanise the Brexit vote and tip the scales towards all the things I forecast; so why am I even suggesting it?
Imagine what would happen if Jeremy arranged a private meeting with Cameron - as he is allowed to as HMLotO - and said, "We have to come to some new understandings or Labour will back the Brexit. You have to ensure several, if not all, of my demands are met or you'll be out of work before I am." Dave could tell him to sod off, but this referendum is no longer just about our position in the world, it is about the battle for power of the Conservative party and about who will be in #10 a week/month after the result.
Labour could achieve some things - reversal of planned changes to boundaries; guarantees against tax credit cuts; getting the press to back off - heck Labour could take a truckload of demands and handle negotiations in a far more hard-nosed way than Cameron could ever imagine, but they probably won't and you have to ask yourself how someone who doesn't run the country and has no hope of running the country can work that one out but the people wanting to run the country haven't? This might have happened and Dave might be confident we'll stay in; but he doesn't look it and no one trusts polls any more.
This might be a time of scary uncertainty, but it's also a time for real serious politics; stuff like this is how deals for the benefit of good are often struck. Voting to come out of Europe, especially now doesn't make us safe, it makes us alone with no guaranteed allies. Honestly, do you think if Britain stuck two fingers up to the rest of Europe by reinforcing and expressing every xenophobe's disdain, that anywhere in Europe is going to be rushing to negotiation tables for anything? Really? You might say 'but they'll need us and our money' and you might be right; but I'll bet they wouldn't mind some of Russia's money, but they don't need it. Remember that - THEY DON'T NEED IT.
It's not something that will sit well with people, especially people like me who have suffered from the austerity program, but the threat of something much worse looms.
If Britain votes to pull out of the EU, we'll end up with a far right wing led Tory party that will make Cameron and Osborne seem reasonable and almost benevolent. The reason we'll end up with that is not only will we be free of those pesky benefits of being in Europe, we'll also lose the PM and any chance of Gideon becoming the next PM. That looks like a brilliant idea; get rid of the Eton scumbags; except can you imagine a country run by Michael Gove, Theresa May and a PM who looks like a special needs albino dandelion and believe the welfare state is still far too bloated. Imagine a country without an NHS and the state pension abolished after a certain period, so that everyone in the country will either have to arrange a private pension or get nothing when they choose to retire, or never retire as the case will be.
That's probably where this Tory party will take us, but under Cameron and co that might not happen for another 10 years; under Boris, Gove and the wife of the 'owner' of G4S 'reforms' will happen much faster and anything that hasn't been privatised will be. This isn't me scaremongering, go and look at some of these people's speeches and their ideology, if you can be bothered, and see just how extreme some of them are.
I'll give you an example of how the world has changed in the last 15 years. Glenn Hoddle was sacked as England football team manager because his religious belief told him that disabled people could be sinners in a previous life. This was blown out of all proportion, Hoddle - a deeply religious man - was castigated by all sides and his career was effectively destroyed. The Tory party via their evil and Draconian Prove You Are Disabled charter is pretty much blaming the disabled for being disabled and charging their relatives with the sole responsibility of their care. In a world that should be civilised, people with limbs missing are being asked questions that suggest their inability to grow arms or legs back is their fault and not the government's or any of the 'tax' payers - which it isn't, but society does have a moral obligation to look after those who can't look after themselves, or are people suggesting we just leave the disabled to die in their own filth, ignored by people? Ian Duncan Smith would probably be called Hagbastard Thorngristle in a Dickens novel and be far more vile than any of Dickens's creations could ever have been.
The EU has protected us from the Tories persecuting everyone who doesn't have a chance. The only thing a vote to come out will do is allow them to 'legally' screw you over.
So, we need to support the man with a penchant for all things porcine; we need to keep him in power for a few more years at least. As abhorrent as that sounds, I'd rather have Dave than a seriously dangerous group of neo-Nazis that stand to his far right.
The sad thing about this is my own party should be strong and Corbyn should act like a PM - he might have, but we'll never see it. What Corbyn needs to do is hold Cameron to ransom; he needs to Francis Urquhart him and it might be Corbyn's honesty that prevents Labour from gaining much ground from this referendum.
Imagine what shocks it would cause if Jeremy stood up and said, "Do you know something, after much debate and 1000s of emails (from Rose, Nigel, Steve, Dawn...), I think Labour will side with the Brexit vote. We should leave the EU and go it alone." What it would do is totally galvanise the Brexit vote and tip the scales towards all the things I forecast; so why am I even suggesting it?
Imagine what would happen if Jeremy arranged a private meeting with Cameron - as he is allowed to as HMLotO - and said, "We have to come to some new understandings or Labour will back the Brexit. You have to ensure several, if not all, of my demands are met or you'll be out of work before I am." Dave could tell him to sod off, but this referendum is no longer just about our position in the world, it is about the battle for power of the Conservative party and about who will be in #10 a week/month after the result.
Labour could achieve some things - reversal of planned changes to boundaries; guarantees against tax credit cuts; getting the press to back off - heck Labour could take a truckload of demands and handle negotiations in a far more hard-nosed way than Cameron could ever imagine, but they probably won't and you have to ask yourself how someone who doesn't run the country and has no hope of running the country can work that one out but the people wanting to run the country haven't? This might have happened and Dave might be confident we'll stay in; but he doesn't look it and no one trusts polls any more.
This might be a time of scary uncertainty, but it's also a time for real serious politics; stuff like this is how deals for the benefit of good are often struck. Voting to come out of Europe, especially now doesn't make us safe, it makes us alone with no guaranteed allies. Honestly, do you think if Britain stuck two fingers up to the rest of Europe by reinforcing and expressing every xenophobe's disdain, that anywhere in Europe is going to be rushing to negotiation tables for anything? Really? You might say 'but they'll need us and our money' and you might be right; but I'll bet they wouldn't mind some of Russia's money, but they don't need it. Remember that - THEY DON'T NEED IT.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)