1. Hey Guest, welcome back to DLP

    As you can see, we've changed our look. We've migrated from vBulletin to the Xenforo forum system. There may be issues or missing functionality, if you find anything or have feedback, please check out the new Xenforo Migration Feedback forum.

    Our dark ("Dark Lord Potter") theme is under heavy development. We also have a light ("Light Lord Potter") theme for those happier with a light background and darker text.

    Dismiss Notice
Dismiss Notice
Hey Guest! Are you any good at cooking? Got a favourite recipe that you love to cook or bring out to impress that special someone? Why not share it! A new forum called The Burrow has opened and it's all about homemaking!

UK General Election

Discussion in 'Politics' started by Troy, Apr 18, 2017.

  1. Quiddity

    Quiddity Auror

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2014
    Messages:
    645
    Location:
    New Zealand
    What's UKIP's chances looking like? My impression was that their success would cause their undoing, as their point of existence is simultaneously eliminated and discredited.
     
  2. nath1607

    nath1607 Groundskeeper

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2010
    Messages:
    352
    Location:
    Wales, UK
    I think that UKIP is going to crash and burn now that their main goal has been achieved and is being pursued vigourously, due to the FPTP system, and because historically when you looked at the UKIP manifesto however disastrous Brexit would be shockingly it wasn't the stupidest ideas they had. They had things like an encouragement of isolation and severe reduction of foreign aid, which is bad but then combined it with a rapid increase in military spending for some unknown and counter productive reason. The usual Commonwealth bullshit *cough Empire* that for some reason places like Australia or India would welcome Britain with open arms then figuratively bend over when their strategic, economic concerns and relative power between countries are greatly different in the 21st century.

    ---------

    For the election itself May is going to win, and she's gonna secure more leaver room for herself so she doesn't have to pander to a minority of her back benchers as much, and I can easily see a majority government reaching into the high double digits of MPs. I don't think 100+ is likely though.

    For the opposition, they're fucked. They could do reasonably well with a coordinated election campaign but due to the FPTP system they'll neuter each other. The narrative around Corbyn that the media has created has fucked Labour which shows why Blair pandered to them I guess, as they neutered both Brown and Milliband but even then they didn't go to this extent. It could be countered by more politically informed voters, but if that was true Brexit wouldn't have happened in the first place.

    For the Liberal Democrats hopefully the idiotic stain of University fees that's haunted them will finally be put to rest, but I have a feeling the media's going to pop up with it again and try to hammer them with it when they start clawing back some of the seats that Conservatives took from them in 2015. Who knows whether the voters will still listen to that though, I would have liked to say of course not, but ... at least if it does see a resurgance it should be less than that of the pro-EU vote.
     
  3. Invictus

    Invictus Heir

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2013
    Messages:
    2,611
    Location:
    Cidade Maravilhosa
    You mean showing that he's a moron? Because that's what he is. He's a blind moron stuck in the sixties when Labour Unions represented everyone outside the rich and the well-to-do middle class. His Shadow Councillor read Mao's Red Book outlood, in the Parliament. Jezza clumsily implied, willing or not, Israel and the Islamic State. I can go and on.

    Don't blame the EVUL Media for it. Sanders was no more well liked than Corbyn, had stupid unrealistic ideas, but at least he had a coherent message with reality, even if delusional. He also knew how to speak and how politics work. Corbyn's cabinet is filled with morons. His MPs hate him, and guess what, he's not the elected president and a party isn't obliged to follow their leader blindly. Yet, he insists on ideological purity and no compromises.

    [​IMG]
    Look at this. This can't blamed on the media. This is a complete and utter rout immediately after the Tories angered half of the entire freaking UK, massively. Labour in Scotland keeps getting massacred and yet, he's so toxic there that they don't want him campaigning there. SCOTLAND. Where there's no English media and there's less of a conservative streak.

    LAB 31.2% 232 23.0% 0 72 -72 160
    160. Meanwhile, Jenious Corbyn just tried and failed to force through mandatory re-selection of all sitting Labour MPs before the election which is in a maximum of 7 weeks away, that would have forced every CLP with a sitting Labour MP of going through a process of voting if they wanted them to stay on as the candidate or allowing an open selection. Because that's a good idea.

    'Ah, but EVIL Media only show his failures!' Okay. What are his victories then? I'm curious. Hell, he even gave May what she wanted, twice, both by voting for giving her full power on Brexit and giving her the dissolved Parliament.

    And this^ Party leaders have to lead the Party, this is how Parliamentary system works. You can't unite the party, you're alread a failure. That's why no one cried tears when BoJo didn't get shit and when May, a Remainer, assumed. Stupid manevuers to try to circumnavigate unity issues is what brought Brexit.
     
  4. nath1607

    nath1607 Groundskeeper

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2010
    Messages:
    352
    Location:
    Wales, UK
    Seriously? Did you just have a bad day, as that post has a bent of being a childish rant.

    Corbyn from just prior to his initial election has been delegitimised by the media whether that's his personality, how he looks, his beliefs or his goals, and either been wildly misrepresented or misinterpreted. The media within the UK is a very important institution due to the amount of influence it wields due to the people who consume it, who do so on a daily basis with a loyal following, so the narratives they present are the ones that shape peoples opinions whether it's fact or fiction. To claim that Corbyn's current position, even if he has personal faults, hasn't been severely exasperated by the reception is ludicrous. It's as bad as those who claim that advertising doesn't work on them even though it's a 600 billion industry. You are unlikely to have seen it living in Brazil, but when you've gone into shops over the last couple yearson da daily basis and look at the newspapers stands the narratives they've created are shocking, much less how infantile they've been at times.

    I'd advise you read the report the London School of Economics compiled here about it, as they go into it in more depth.
     
  5. Invictus

    Invictus Heir

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2013
    Messages:
    2,611
    Location:
    Cidade Maravilhosa
    Remind me how much positive coverage Trump had again? Oh yeah. Blaming the media for his inablity to have a message that resonate with the public is naive at least, to disingenuous at worse. UK tabloid media is notoriously bad, but shifting the burden in them from Corbyn is frankly ridiculous.

    It also bypasses the fact that Corbyn is message is frankly, stupid. Association with Marxism is rightly seen as beyond stupid, one does not need to look further than USSR and their states to know why. A paper that shows me that tabloids are trash and that rightwing media is against socialist isn't much of a newsworthy thing.

    Finally, you're distorting my argument to fit your persecution complex. Negative press doesn't explain how unpopular Labour is. Lula, Sanders, Trump, Kirchner, Le Pen, etc. All of them loathed or outright hated by their local media. All of them widely popular despite it. And almost all of them won elections. Some even multiple ones. So please, explain how the negative media shifted Labour from a possible victory to being massacred?

    That's my point. It's not the media who took out Corbyn's fighting chance, but the man himself. Readers pick what they read. There's no brainwashing. Most of them read people criticising Corbyn because they dislike the man himself.

    Or are we under the delusion that the Daily Mail approved of politicians who quote Mao's red book?
     
  6. GiantMonkeyMan

    GiantMonkeyMan High Inquisitor

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2008
    Messages:
    517
    Location:
    UK
    Corbyn isn't a marxist. You could argue that John McDonnell, his closest political ally, has had a great deal of his political influence from marxists but even then he's not a marxist either. Then again, it's not as if we can expect newspapers to engage with even a wiff of marxism with anything resembling honesty. Corbyn and McDonnell are social democrats whose policies more closely resemble Keynesian ideas. It's far easier for newspapers to call him 'comrade Corbyn' just as they called Milliband 'Red Ed' despite their policies having very little to do with Marx.
     
  7. Invictus

    Invictus Heir

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2013
    Messages:
    2,611
    Location:
    Cidade Maravilhosa
    I'm not calling him a Marxist because of his economic positions, which are just stupid. Marxist was only an economist in the loosest sense of the word possible, since he was only obsessed with economic policies instead of actual economic data, just like the new Austrian School.

    Marx was a sociologists obsessed with a dialetic confrontation, class dispute and vilification of the capitalist classes. He also preached union of the working class, mega syndicates/unions and that economic institutions should be geared and focused on their 'social role'. Which is stupid and repeatedly probed not work.

    You don't need to defend a dictatorship of the proletariat and appropriation of all means of production to have Marxist influences.
     
  8. GiantMonkeyMan

    GiantMonkeyMan High Inquisitor

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2008
    Messages:
    517
    Location:
    UK
    If Marx wasn't an economist, neither was Adam Smith. Honestly, I don't particularly want to turn this into a debate about Marx, suffice to say that you're wrong about him and his ideas. All I wanted to point out that it didn't matter what Corbyn's policies are if, just like the media lambasted Miliband for the 'sins' of his father, they are dismissed for the merest association with Marx.

    Corbyn came to the leadership of his party because the base membership wanted to have a decent opposition to privatisation instead of a lukewarm one associated with the beginnings of that privatisation through Blair. The basic principle of those policies, particularly preventing the selling off of the NHS and the disruption of education and such, are not unpopular. The vast majority of people in the UK polled that they wanted the trains to be renationalised and a large number also wanted gas, electric and water to be the same. This was not the focus of the media coverage of Corbyn, however.
     
  9. Oment

    Oment The Betrayer

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2011
    Messages:
    1,534
    Point of order: the (current) DM doesn't approve of most things that were done, made, or legislated in the last 100 years, up to and including the Race Relations Act of 1965, universal suffrage, the dissolution of The Empire, the decriminalisation of same-sex relations, car safety regulations, and probably most foods that aren't pub grub. Arguably the declaration of war in '39, too.

    Re: Corbyn - he's never struck me as someone who is comfortable with leading and being this much in the spotlight. The fact that he's positioned more on the fringes of the PLP is a (major) hindrance, but even if you magically shifted the entire Labour Party to around Corbyn's ideological position, I still feel that the politics of today - often brusque, uncompromising, every word mattering, the likes - are very/too unfavourable for someone of his character to be an effective parliamentary leader.
     
  10. Giovanni

    Giovanni God of Scotch

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2005
    Messages:
    8,329
    Location:
    Gilligan's Island
    Corbyn allies complaining about how the media represents him should spend less time doing that and more time looking at the series of strategic blunders he's made throughout his failed foray onto the front bench.

    Also, I know they're scripted and largely BS, but if my dog were half as pathetic as him during PMQs I'd shoot it.
     
  11. Immet

    Immet Seventh Year

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2012
    Messages:
    211
    I think Labour should be led by someone with most of Corbyn's policies, and an effective leader who could put forward the policies and how Labour in charge would help the general public would do well. And just about any party would be better off than the Tories continuing to fuck things over.

    However, Corbyn himself is almost unsalvageable because of a really weird mix of
    • the general public don't realise that they actually agree with most of Corbyn's policies because of the biased media attacking him
    • Corbyn fucking things up repeatedly.
     
  12. Darth_Revan

    Darth_Revan Secret Squirrel Prestige DLP Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2006
    Messages:
    86
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    The Empire City
    High Score:
    2810
    Marx wasn't an economist, he was a political theorist who couched his theories in economic context. His focus was always on advocating class struggle and political change, not on economic policy; socialism was the derivative of his workers' utopia, not the cause of it.

    Corbyn is an feckless idiot, whether or not he's a Marxist. He's living proof that the Labour voting membership is three bagpipes short of a taco stand.
     
  13. Taure

    Taure Magical Core Enthusiast Prestige DLP Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2006
    Messages:
    948
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    High Score:
    13,152
    Corbyn wants to nationalise the rail operators and print hundreds of billions of pounds to dump into the hands of the general population. While these are not really Marxist, they're not exactly social democratic ideas either.
     
  14. Erotic Adventures of S

    Erotic Adventures of S Denarii Host

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2006
    Messages:
    2,192
    Location:
    New Zealand
    How well does your rail run? A lot of countries simply can support private rail and need it to be a national run company.
     
  15. GiantMonkeyMan

    GiantMonkeyMan High Inquisitor

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2008
    Messages:
    517
    Location:
    UK
    This suggests a separation of economics and politics that simply doesn't exist. What is 'economic policy' except a political change? Besides all that, to suggest that Marx wasn't an economist is to reveal your lack of engaging with Marx's body of work. His economic manuscripts, Capital in particular, are derived from his analysis of the economic developments of his era. You can virtually take any chapter of Capital and see his analysis of multiple financial reports, factory efficiency surveys and such - he followed the traditions of Ricardo, Malthus, Smith and all the other classical economists in his approach, just came to different conclusions.

    I'm not a supporter of Corbyn or McDonnell but the appeal of Corbyn has everything to do with the base membership of the Labour Party being frustrated by the soft-tory policies of the Blairite leadership. The membership of the Labour Party wanted something different, something honest and not just another robot in a suit. This, I feel, could have be formed into a successful campaign and drawn in the broader voting population, if Corbyn wasn't such a wet blanket.

    These are precisely social democratic ideas. The railways, along with many other public services, were first nationalised by the social democratic Labour in the post-war period. Quantitative easing isn't exactly a hallmark of social democracy but the goals of Corbyn in using this fiscal strategy suggest it being employed to assist state-sponsored projects and community projects as opposed to private initiatives. In a sense, it's following the old Keynesian public works to reduce unemployment strategy that most social democrats of the past have utilised.
     
  16. Invictus

    Invictus Heir

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2013
    Messages:
    2,611
    Location:
    Cidade Maravilhosa
    Let's see... soft-Tory Labour had an unprecedent 12 years in power. Before that? Massacre after massacre against Thatcher. Now we got Corbyn 'bring back the Unions' at the front and... everything points out to another massacre. Interesting. I feel like we're seeing a pattern. Maybe, just maybe, Labour as a national party should be worried with national politics that are agreeable to the entire country instead of just their base? Or is the case that the ignorant masses don't know what's good for them?

    Fake premises lead to fake conclusions. Economy isn't politics, neither macro or micro economics. It is, in fact, a whole separate science, that's why Economy and Economy and Politics. Companies institute economic policies to maximize profits, is that too politics? Change in production, adding X or Y to their production chain, change Z? Or are you saying that any economic change will have effects on human beings and thus its political? Then all engineers are political actors too.
     
    Last edited: Apr 21, 2017
  17. Erandil

    Erandil Headmaster

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2008
    Messages:
    1,127
    Location:
    Germany
    I think I saw some polls that suggested that there was actually a lot of support for the various individual policies promoted by Labour, it just doesn't seem to translate into actual support for the party itself.
     
  18. Quiddity

    Quiddity Auror

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2014
    Messages:
    645
    Location:
    New Zealand
    The misuse of Keynes really gets my goat. Keynes argued for counter-cyclical fiscal policy. That means public works are justified in times of recession, not as a general principle.

    Keynesianism doesn't have a position on big vs. small government.
     
  19. GiantMonkeyMan

    GiantMonkeyMan High Inquisitor

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2008
    Messages:
    517
    Location:
    UK
    In general it's a little reductionist, there was a lot more than 'Thatcher' and 'unions' that led to the Tories in power for so long before Blair and there was a lot more than Blair and New Labour that led to the Tories being booted out. However, it's very likely that Corbyn will lose - possibly not by as much as some people predict but regardless. Based on nothing but gut feeling, I predict the election will have a very low turn out which might benefit Corbyn somewhat but won't prevent the inevitable.

    A lot of Corbyn and Labour's individual policies are quite popular amongst broad swathes of the population but he's just a PR disaster and failed to convey them in any accessible way.

    I would say that human beings are fundamentally political animals but more specifically that all economic decisions of merit are taken within the context of the political sphere within which it is possible to make those decisions. However, I'm not going to argue this point as it only tangentially relates to the focus of this thread and besides I can't be bothered.

    I only very vaguely mentioned Keynes as his fiscal ideas were often adopted by social democrats. I wasn't suggesting whether or not Corbyn and his policies were applying the concepts of Keynes 'correctly', or even at all, but rather that Corbyn's policy to utilise QE to invest in local communities and state run services in order to reduce unemployment and generate consumption of goods follows on from the social democratic traditions of the past, of which Keynes was a huge influence. Perhaps I worded it badly.
     
    Last edited: Apr 22, 2017
  20. Invictus

    Invictus Heir

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2013
    Messages:
    2,611
    Location:
    Cidade Maravilhosa