The following images were leaked out of the high-level (sic) Scottish Labour leadership discussions that are taking place*.
The other day I came across this headline…
Progressive party of the past: Labor fails to inspire
Ok, so the spelling is a bit of a giveaway but although the man is talking about Australia, it is remarkable how much could apply to the UK Labour party.
In the following excerpts the names have been omitted to protect the guilty. What they show is that (as if we didn’t already know it) the race to the destroy everything in the big capitalist clusterf*ck™ is truly international…
Ian Watson also noted that over the past two decades, there has been a “growing polarisation in wages”, and “growing underemployment at the bottom of the labour market”. He further noted the “growth in precarious employment throughout the labour market, evident in growing rates of casualisation”, which “represents the success of a neoliberal agenda aimed at achieving increasing flexibility in the deployment of labour and a general restructuring of the world of work in the interests of capital”.
___________ has conducted important analysis of the media in _______. He knows perfectly well that there is an immense Murdoch apparatus ready and eager to fight for a right-wing policy agenda. The Left may fight for the _____ if the _____ pursues progressive policies. It has not done so.
As long as the _______ remains a timid, tepid party that wavers between compromising and surrendering to big business, a kind of Liberal Party-lite, it is hard to see how it will inspire people to fight for it, and increase its level of support beyond its current abysmal levels.
Read the full article by Michael Brull here…
This documentary, from BBC Alba, is essential viewing for anyone from the UK or Ireland but particularly Scottish people. It is also essential viewing for anyone with an interest in politics in general and constitutional issues.
It catalogues the history of obstacles placed in the way of the Scottish Independence movement over the years by the London government . While some of it will be well-known to some of you, a lot of it will be new I suspect.
The first part is here and the links to the next parts are on the continuation page…
There is a lot of talk today about the report by the Institute for Fiscal Studies that suggests that the budget of George “the progressively” Osbourne is much more on the regressive side than we might have been led to believe.
The poor are not only paying more than the rich in proportion to their income – the standard statistical definition of being “regressive”. But the poorest groups are paying more from their vastly smaller incomes than almost all the richest groups in cash terms.
The IFS says its study found that the poorest six tenths of households lost more in cash terms as a result of the Budget measures than wealthier households in all but the richest 10 per cent.
All I am asking here is the same question that I asked here, and that is simply this – why are people so shocked and/or surprised?
You shouldn’t be suprised because this is what the tories ARE. This is what they do and what they have almost always done.
Don’t get me wrong, Labour, particularly New Labour have very often behaved the same way.
The point is that there has been no significant change in the direction of UK economic policy since Thatcher. The devastating reforms she introduced have only been deepened by successive governments and only the presentation and the faces have changed.
When in foreign parts I once described the location of Scotland to someone who had never heard of the country as “more or less between England and Norway” and today I found an interesting little piece of information on that front…
104 years ago today Norway and Sweden solved the outstanding disagreements and dissolved their union which had existed from 1815 to 1905 [and briefly at two other times in their respective histories].
As far as I am aware the two countries seem to be doing quite well for themselves on their own these days and there seems to be no serious hostility or no outbreaks of outright war on the horizon.
I hope Scots everywhere can soon join the Norwegians in having a ‘Dissolution Day’ of our own to celebrate [the Dissolution day is actually celebrated on June 7th].
“‘[the] days of Britain having to apologise for its colonial history are over…. We should celebrate much of our past rather than apologise for it. And we should talk, and rightly so, about British values that are enduring, because they stand for some of the greatest ideas in history: tolerance, liberty, civic duty, that grew in Britain and influenced the rest of the world. Our strong traditions of fair play, of openness, of internationalism, these are great British values.”
Gordon Brown has said he is sorry for the “appalling” way World War II code breaker Alan Turing was treated for being gay.
“While Mr Turing was dealt with under the law of the time and we can’t put the clock back, his treatment was of course utterly unfair and I am pleased to have the chance to say how deeply sorry I and we all are for what happened to him.”
So…one thing merits an apology and was appalling even though it was ‘dealt with’ using the laws of the time and another kind of disgraceful and/or murderous behaviour should be celebrated.
I wonder if it has anything to do with compensation or if it is just that he is a complete prick?
Political language — and with variations this is true of all political parties, from Conservatives to Anarchists — is designed to make lies sound truthful and murder respectable, and to give an appearance of solidity to pure wind.
1 – Social Responsibility – this slogan is used as a way of making people feel good about simply agreeing with the government. Therefore when they don’t protest against unfair measures or indulge in civil disobedience they aren’t being passive or apathetic – they are in fact being “socially responsible”. Exercising the democratic right to disagree is seen as socially irresponsible.
2 – Back to Basics – if a tired neoliberal government has seen its popularity fall year on year with scandal after scandal piling up what should they do? Obviously a sensible option would be to launch a campaign promoting Victorian values and preaching about the wholesome nature of family values. They should of course do all this whilst simultaneously sleeping with their married colleagues, getting involved in insider dealing scandals and promoting and pardoning perjurers and fraudsters.
After all, a recreation of Victorian morality may suit them well and if they do bring about the Victorian values that they have been seeking all sorts of wonderful things may happen. If the policy is successful then there will be one rule for the ruling classes and another one for the poorer classes, especially in relation to debauchery and licentiousness. They will also continue to be elected because they will have revived an ill-deserved respect for authority.
In the best international traditions of the Victorian regime they will have put into place an economic order which allows them to steal primary resources from developing nations at an extraordinary rate whilst giving them nothing in return – they can even claim to be helping them by giving them a tiny fraction of the money they rob from them in “trade” back in bilateral aid agreements, provided of course that they use the money to buy goods and weapons made in their own country
p.s. if the electorate happen to catch on to the fact that they are all a bunch of lying scumbags then they can always pass the torch on to another version of themselves in a different colour.
I am listening to Blair’s last Prime Minister’s Questions and most of the MPs
are falling over themselves to congratulate him.
Let’s not forget that according to the UN the waging of an aggressive war is “essentially an evil thing…to initiate a war of aggression…is not only an international crime; it is the supreme international crime differing only from other war crimes in that it contains within itself the accumulated evil of the whole.”