Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Options

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Age is not just a number: Corbyn’s greying pals

SystemSystem Posts: 11,014
edited September 2018 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Age is not just a number: Corbyn’s greying pals

Stalin liked a good purge. Leaving aside his sadistic and psychopathic tendencies, and the fact that they kept population, politicians, military and everyone else in greater or lesser states of constant fear, they also raised him closer to the god-like status he presumably aspired to. Not just because he was ultimately directing events, nor the pseudo-religious worship but the fact that by the late 1930s, he alone remained of the revered revolutionary generation. Everyone else had died naturally, been executed or exiled.

Read the full story here


«134

Comments

  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 58,961
    Thanks for the header, David. :)
  • Options
    Urgent news from New York.... The pizza parlours are selling pepperoni and pineapple pizza in every shop I've been in.... I blame trump and brexit...
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 58,961

    Urgent news from New York.... The pizza parlours are selling pepperoni and pineapple pizza in every shop I've been in.... I blame trump and brexit...

    Good God :o I hope you stockpiled a year's worth of supply :D
  • Options
    Buying them up and ditching them in the Hudson... My bit for humanity....
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 58,961

    Buying them up and ditching them in the Hudson... My bit for humanity....

    A 21st century equivalent of the Boston Tea Party? More rebellions in the Colonies to crush.... :D
  • Options
    I brought some Yorkshire tea bags with me.... This Lipton stuff shows the Boston tea thing put American civilisation back 200 years. Surprised they've not asked us back to run things. No kettle in hotel room either, just coffee percolator.... I mean, honestly what is the world coming to.
  • Options
    A point of fact, several of the Old Bolsheviks survived into undeserved old age, outliving Stalin by decades.
  • Options

    Urgent news from New York.... The pizza parlours are selling pepperoni and pineapple pizza in every shop I've been in.... I blame trump and brexit...

    Pineapple on pizza is peak globalism, see this r/neoliberal thread:
    https://www.reddit.com/r/neoliberal/comments/9bghrd/pineapple_on_pizza_is_peak_globalism/

    "Pineapple on pizza was invented in 1962 by a greek immigrant living in Canada who was inspired by Chinese cuisine to put a south american food on an Italian dish."
  • Options

    Urgent news from New York.... The pizza parlours are selling pepperoni and pineapple pizza in every shop I've been in.... I blame trump and brexit...

    Trump, Brexit, and that child sex and murder ring Hillary Clinton was running.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pizzagate_conspiracy_theory
    https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/anatomy-of-a-fake-news-scandal-125877/
  • Options
    DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300
    edited September 2018
    Deleted: Charles thought of the same joke and his butler types faster than me.
  • Options
    If you read the whole thing or just scroll to the bottom, it turns out to be a book extract aka plug. I thought it seemed odd that the article never quite got to the point.
  • Options
    CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758

    If you read the whole thing or just scroll to the bottom, it turns out to be a book extract aka plug. I thought it seemed odd that the article never quite got to the point.
    It also muddled up a lot of things, conflates history with the present, and doesn’t take into account the changes that have been implemented in the last few years.

    Not one for me
  • Options
    I'm reminded of my favourite Soviet joke (then re-applied to New Labour by Paul Foot) and still apposite in Corbyn's Labour:

    The Future is Certain!
    It's the past that keeps changing.....
  • Options
    Beverley_CBeverley_C Posts: 6,256
    Pineapples and shell companies and potentially our very own Stalin in the making. What a depressing start to the day. I think I will skip out and have a pamper session to cheer myself up. My nails could do with a nice new French polish.
  • Options
    Good morning, everyone.

    Quite curious to see what the weather is in Milan (for the race).

    Let us hope we don't find out what it's like when a cabal of elderly far left fools get into power.
  • Options

    What a depressing start to the day.

    Look at some of the May video mashes on the previous thread....if they don't raise a smile, check for a pulse....
  • Options
    FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,578
    Jezza also has quite a few youngsters in the shadow cabinet such as Angela Rayner.

    Abbot needs to retire, but John McDonnell has been surprisingly good at his job.
  • Options
    MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 50,100
    If the Old Guard are to let young whippersnappers into their ranks, presumably they have to have demonstrated a special level of dedication to Corbyn. You can't afford to do anything, say anything that conflicts with current thinking. Suggesting "well, Tony Blair did have SOME good ideas" or "perhaps we should consider both sides in the Israel-Palestine issue?" is instant career-death.

    It's why I believe that it is doomed as a Party. It just becomes ever less attractive to commit your life to. As a bright young ambitious politician, you have to sign up to full-fat Corbynism to get onboard. Until 2015, it had been a niche view of the world, even in the politics of the left. But now you have a clique who still bang on about Stalin and Mao as though the past century of experimentation with their ideas had never happened. "We can still make it work!".

    Corbynism is Einstein's quote* made flesh: insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results. That's what joining the Old Guard requires. A continuation of a century of experimental failure. And the people who will suffer most in these experiments are the very people they claim to be looking out for.

    *there is some doubt if it should actually be attributed to him. But whoever, it was some smart person...
  • Options

    Good morning, everyone.

    Quite curious to see what the weather is in Milan (for the race).

    Let us hope we don't find out what it's like when a cabal of elderly far left fools get into power.

    The senile old trots might accidentally crash us out of the EU with no preparation for life outside, you mean? Yes, it is a worry. And knife crime will go through the roof when Diane Abbot sacks 20,000 coppers.
  • Options
    Mr. JohnL, the incompetence and dithering of May is not something I will argue against.

    Having a man who describes Hamas as his friends, is 'present' but not 'involved' when laying a wreath at a funeral for men of dubious character (to be excessively polite), and whose followers think the way to response to Jewish fears is to accuse them of evil plotting is not a fit man to be PM.

    That's before we get onto his lunatic nationalisation plans, desire to axe Trident, standing up for Russia when they used chemical weaponry on British soil, etc etc etc.

    I'd be fascinated to know: is there a single instance of Corbyn taking the UK's side against, say, Irish terrorists? Or the Russians? Or Iran?

    Just wondering.
  • Options
    FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,578

    What a depressing start to the day.

    Look at some of the May video mashes on the previous thread....if they don't raise a smile, check for a pulse....
    This is better still.

    https://twitter.com/ChrisBottaNHL/status/1035491166077235201?s=19
  • Options

    Mr. JohnL, the incompetence and dithering of May is not something I will argue against.

    Having a man who describes Hamas as his friends, is 'present' but not 'involved' when laying a wreath at a funeral for men of dubious character (to be excessively polite), and whose followers think the way to response to Jewish fears is to accuse them of evil plotting is not a fit man to be PM.

    That's before we get onto his lunatic nationalisation plans, desire to axe Trident, standing up for Russia when they used chemical weaponry on British soil, etc etc etc.

    I'd be fascinated to know: is there a single instance of Corbyn taking the UK's side against, say, Irish terrorists? Or the Russians? Or Iran?

    Just wondering.

    So never mind the actual damage done by the government since 2010, here are some reds under the bed scares about a man who will probably have retired by the next election, and whose 2017 manifesto included retaining Trident.
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,181
    'by the late 1930s, he alone remained of the revered revolutionary generation. Everyone else had died naturally, been executed or exiled.'

    Molotov was still there. Indeed, still Prime Minister.
  • Options
    tlg86tlg86 Posts: 25,189
    I think Hammond looks good for 62.
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,181
    edited September 2018
    Foxy said:

    Jezza also has quite a few youngsters in the shadow cabinet such as Angela Rayner.

    Abbot needs to retire, but John McDonnell has been surprisingly good at his job.

    There are in fact several such youngsters spread through various front bench roles - Pidcock, Long-Bailey, Cat Smith, Clive Lewis, Dan Carden - plus Thornberry who is 58.

    The problem is there are too few of them to replace the old guard and keep the shadow cabinet ideologically pure. There is a reason why there are such a lot of old stagers creaking on.

    I am intrigued though by one remark. Hammond and May I know are both over sixty - but who's the third one?
  • Options
    Mr. JohnL, they're not under the bed. They're on Labour's front bench.

    Is there a single time Corbyn sided with the UK against Irish terrorists, or the Russians, or Iran?

    He's been an MP for decades. There might be one, even if he did it by accident.

    I can think of times in the last few years he sided with the Russian state against us when they used chemical weapons on British soil. A few years ago he attended an anniversary celebration of Iran's religious revolution. Shortly after the attempt to assassinate Margaret Thatcher he invited Gerry Adams to Parliament.

    Which part of that is 'under the bed' or a 'scare story'?

    And that's just off the top of my head, without even considering what the 'bomb and bullet' and 'best of our movement' Shadow Chancellor has come out with.

    Perhaps you should call Corbyn up and ask him to lay a wreath for your argument about scare stories.
  • Options
    tlg86 said:

    I think Hammond looks good for 62.

    62? You can get 66/1 against Hammond as next PM from Betfred, and he will be 66 years old in 2022. Coincidence? Well, yes, but he still looks a good outside bet if Theresa May steps down between Brexit and the 2022 election.
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,181

    tlg86 said:

    I think Hammond looks good for 62.

    62? You can get 66/1 against Hammond as next PM from Betfred, and he will be 66 years old in 2022. Coincidence? Well, yes, but he still looks a good outside bet if Theresa May steps down between Brexit and the 2022 election.
    Those odds are probably too long - he is after all the most senior cabinet minister by both rank and length of service - but all the same I don't think he'll get it. His best chance was last time and he declined to run, instead flinging his weight behind May and thereby all but guaranteeing her victory. I think he will again choose to be kingmaker.
  • Options
    ydoethur said:


    I am intrigued though by one remark. Hammond and May I know are both over sixty - but who's the third one?

    David Lidington.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Lidington
  • Options
    MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 50,100
    edited September 2018
    ydoethur said:

    Foxy said:

    Jezza also has quite a few youngsters in the shadow cabinet such as Angela Rayner.

    Abbot needs to retire, but John McDonnell has been surprisingly good at his job.

    There are in fact several such youngsters spread through various front bench roles - Pidcock, Long-Bailey, Cat Smith, Clive Lewis, Dan Carden - plus Thornberry who is 58.

    The problem is there are too few of them to replace the old guard and keep the shadow cabinet ideologically pure. There is a reason why there are such a lot of old stagers creaking on.

    I am intrigued though by one remark. Hammond and May I know are both over sixty - but who's the third one?
    David Lidington, born in 1956.

    Edit: Damn it, loses out in a speed trial to the Decrepit One.....
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,181
    edited September 2018
    Thank you gentlemen. I had no idea he was such a veteran.
  • Options
    OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 31,964
    Foxy said:

    Jezza also has quite a few youngsters in the shadow cabinet such as Angela Rayner.

    Abbot needs to retire, but John McDonnell has been surprisingly good at his job.

    Whoever advises Abbott on managing her diabetes doesn’t do anywhere near as good a job as whoever advises May.
    That, of course, could be unfair. Diabetes can be rather a fragile and unpredictable condition.
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,181

    Foxy said:

    Jezza also has quite a few youngsters in the shadow cabinet such as Angela Rayner.

    Abbot needs to retire, but John McDonnell has been surprisingly good at his job.

    Whoever advises Abbott on managing her diabetes doesn’t do anywhere near as good a job as whoever advises May.
    That, of course, could be unfair. Diabetes can be rather a fragile and unpredictable condition.
    I think the fact May is physically very fit and active while Abbott is, umm, not, probably has something to do with that as well.
  • Options
    Great thread. All of the people mentioned outside of McDonnell and Abbott are potential traitors. None of them can be trusted. Nandy and Lewis were future leadership material and they turned Tory. Wouldnt bet against Rayner being a Tory after she defended Blair.
  • Options
    Corbyn is going nowhere and will probably hang on until 80 if he can.
  • Options
    FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,578

    Foxy said:

    Jezza also has quite a few youngsters in the shadow cabinet such as Angela Rayner.

    Abbot needs to retire, but John McDonnell has been surprisingly good at his job.

    Whoever advises Abbott on managing her diabetes doesn’t do anywhere near as good a job as whoever advises May.
    That, of course, could be unfair. Diabetes can be rather a fragile and unpredictable condition.
    May is late onset type 1, so amenable to insulin. With her variable hours and unpredictable schedule ambulatory glucose monitoring seems a good plan.

    I think Abbott has type 2 and has a number of related medical problems, so rather more complicated and varying insulin not likely to be the answer.

    .

  • Options
    FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,578
    houndtang said:

    Corbyn is going nowhere and will probably hang on until 80 if he can.

    Jezza is very healthy, with a slightly austere lifestyle that is likely to keep him that way. I suspect that he will carry on for a while yet.

    He does need to promote a few more youngsters from the class of 2017. Lammy would make a good Shadow Home Secretary.

  • Options
    ydoethur said:

    'by the late 1930s, he alone remained of the revered revolutionary generation. Everyone else had died naturally, been executed or exiled.'

    Molotov was still there. Indeed, still Prime Minister.

    He was of the generation but (1) he wasn't all that senior in 1917. He didn't rise to high office until the early 1920s (Pravda notwithstanding). As such, he wasn't a reputational threat to Stalin. (2) He was a Stalin protégé, so in 1937-8, was more similar in political attributes to the successor generation than Stalin's contemporaries. And (3) he was about to be purged in 1953, so while the timescale might have been different, the political dynamic was the same.
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,181
    edited September 2018

    ydoethur said:

    'by the late 1930s, he alone remained of the revered revolutionary generation. Everyone else had died naturally, been executed or exiled.'

    Molotov was still there. Indeed, still Prime Minister.

    He was of the generation but (1) he wasn't all that senior in 1917. He didn't rise to high office until the early 1920s (Pravda notwithstanding). As such, he wasn't a reputational threat to Stalin. (2) He was a Stalin protégé, so in 1937-8, was more similar in political attributes to the successor generation than Stalin's contemporaries. And (3) he was about to be purged in 1953, so while the timescale might have been different, the political dynamic was the same.
    Party boss in Petrograd in 1917 wasn't senior?

    It's a view I suppose...

    Odd character. Considering the way Stalin treated him and particularly his wife the way he continued to defend Stalin even as late as the Gorbachev era was extraordinary. Not to mention of course the capacity for stinky drink that gave him the nickname 'Ironarse.'

    Edit - that was an autocorrect error, but I quite like it.
  • Options
    TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 40,014
    edited September 2018

    ydoethur said:

    'by the late 1930s, he alone remained of the revered revolutionary generation. Everyone else had died naturally, been executed or exiled.'

    Molotov was still there. Indeed, still Prime Minister.

    He was of the generation but (1) he wasn't all that senior in 1917. He didn't rise to high office until the early 1920s (Pravda notwithstanding). As such, he wasn't a reputational threat to Stalin. (2) He was a Stalin protégé, so in 1937-8, was more similar in political attributes to the successor generation than Stalin's contemporaries. And (3) he was about to be purged in 1953, so while the timescale might have been different, the political dynamic was the same.
    Kaganovich, Voroshilov..
  • Options
    FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,578
    edited September 2018

    ydoethur said:

    'by the late 1930s, he alone remained of the revered revolutionary generation. Everyone else had died naturally, been executed or exiled.'

    Molotov was still there. Indeed, still Prime Minister.

    He was of the generation but (1) he wasn't all that senior in 1917. He didn't rise to high office until the early 1920s (Pravda notwithstanding). As such, he wasn't a reputational threat to Stalin. (2) He was a Stalin protégé, so in 1937-8, was more similar in political attributes to the successor generation than Stalin's contemporaries. And (3) he was about to be purged in 1953, so while the timescale might have been different, the political dynamic was the same.
    The early revolutionaries were a very small group, so not too surprising that not many were left, particularly after the power stuggles of the Twenties.

    I am not convinced that there are a lot of lessons for the modern Labour party. Labour MPs are often first elected in the waves of 1997 onwards, so are an older generation than the Tories who were first elected in 2010 and 2015.

    There are plenty of engaged youngsters. Retirements and reselections will bring in new faces, indeed one old timer has gone this week, in Frank Field.
  • Options
    IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,254
    Neither of the parties (indeed arguably none of them) are doing a very good job in developing what talent there might be in the next generation of MPs.
  • Options
    Foxy said:

    houndtang said:

    Corbyn is going nowhere and will probably hang on until 80 if he can.

    Jezza is very healthy, with a slightly austere lifestyle that is likely to keep him that way. I suspect that he will carry on for a while yet.

    He does need to promote a few more youngsters from the class of 2017. Lammy would make a good Shadow Home Secretary.
    Lammy is an ... interesting choice. Whilst I applaud his knowledge and work to help disadvantaged black youths, he has shown other aspects of his character that might well make him unsuitable for HS. For instance, his rather ridiculous ability to see racism where it does not exist.

    Why do you think he'd make a good HS?
  • Options
    Foxy said:

    ydoethur said:

    'by the late 1930s, he alone remained of the revered revolutionary generation. Everyone else had died naturally, been executed or exiled.'

    Molotov was still there. Indeed, still Prime Minister.

    He was of the generation but (1) he wasn't all that senior in 1917. He didn't rise to high office until the early 1920s (Pravda notwithstanding). As such, he wasn't a reputational threat to Stalin. (2) He was a Stalin protégé, so in 1937-8, was more similar in political attributes to the successor generation than Stalin's contemporaries. And (3) he was about to be purged in 1953, so while the timescale might have been different, the political dynamic was the same.
    The early revolutionaries were a very small group, so not too surprising that not many were left, particularly after the power stuggles of the Twenties.

    I am not convinced that there are a lot of lessons for the modern Labour party. Labour MPs are often first elected in the waves of 1997 onwards, so are an older generation than the Tories who were first elected in 2010 and 2015.

    There are plenty of engaged youngsters. Retirements and reselections will bring in new faces, indeed one old timer has gone this week, in Frank Field.
    Is that true about 1997? Most of those who were elected then will have been in marginals or nominally Tory seats, which have largely reverted, bar a few areas where changing demographics, political culture or boundary changes have impacted. Granted, a few have yo-yoed out and back in.

    In any case, the polls problem is with the front bench rather than the PLP as a whole.
  • Options
    Ishmael_ZIshmael_Z Posts: 8,981

    If the Old Guard are to let young whippersnappers into their ranks, presumably they have to have demonstrated a special level of dedication to Corbyn. You can't afford to do anything, say anything that conflicts with current thinking. Suggesting "well, Tony Blair did have SOME good ideas" or "perhaps we should consider both sides in the Israel-Palestine issue?" is instant career-death.

    It's why I believe that it is doomed as a Party. It just becomes ever less attractive to commit your life to. As a bright young ambitious politician, you have to sign up to full-fat Corbynism to get onboard. Until 2015, it had been a niche view of the world, even in the politics of the left. But now you have a clique who still bang on about Stalin and Mao as though the past century of experimentation with their ideas had never happened. "We can still make it work!".

    Corbynism is Einstein's quote* made flesh: insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results. That's what joining the Old Guard requires. A continuation of a century of experimental failure. And the people who will suffer most in these experiments are the very people they claim to be looking out for.

    *there is some doubt if it should actually be attributed to him. But whoever, it was some smart person...

    It is rubbish because it is only true of the uninteresting minority of things we do which are completely determined. You tossed a coin and got heads? Pretty stupid to call tails next time. You applied for a job and failed? Obviously don't make the stupid mistake of ever applying for another one, then.
  • Options
    FregglesFreggles Posts: 3,486

    Urgent news from New York.... The pizza parlours are selling pepperoni and pineapple pizza in every shop I've been in.... I blame trump and brexit...

    A great combination. Spicy and sweet.
  • Options
    FregglesFreggles Posts: 3,486
    Long-Bailey and Pidcock incoming.
    What price Aaron Bastani getting a nice safe Labour seat next time?
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,983
    Corbyn has an older team around him as most of the PLP oppose Corbynism and hard Left politics and those who back it and who hold key positions in the Shadow Cabinet ie McDonnell, Abbott, Gardiner etc tend to be those who have been with Corbyn for a long time.

    If he does become PM Corbyn would almost certainly be over 70 given the next general election is not due until 2022 and he is 69 now which would make him the oldest incoming PM since Gladstone in 1892
  • Options
    MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 50,100
    ydoethur said:

    Foxy said:

    Jezza also has quite a few youngsters in the shadow cabinet such as Angela Rayner.

    Abbot needs to retire, but John McDonnell has been surprisingly good at his job.

    Whoever advises Abbott on managing her diabetes doesn’t do anywhere near as good a job as whoever advises May.
    That, of course, could be unfair. Diabetes can be rather a fragile and unpredictable condition.
    I think the fact May is physically very fit and active while Abbott is, umm, not, probably has something to do with that as well.
    Abbot needs to take up hill-walking and African dancing.....
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,983

    tlg86 said:

    I think Hammond looks good for 62.

    62? You can get 66/1 against Hammond as next PM from Betfred, and he will be 66 years old in 2022. Coincidence? Well, yes, but he still looks a good outside bet if Theresa May steps down between Brexit and the 2022 election.
    The only way Hammond gets it is if he gets a coronation or ends up facing Anna Soubry in the run off, otherwise Tory members would vote for almost any candidate bar Hammond if he gets to the final 2
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,484
    edited September 2018
    Ishmael_Z said:

    If the Old Guard are to let young whippersnappers into their ranks, presumably they have to have demonstrated a special level of dedication to Corbyn. You can't afford to do anything, say anything that conflicts with current thinking. Suggesting "well, Tony Blair did have SOME good ideas" or "perhaps we should consider both sides in the Israel-Palestine issue?" is instant career-death.

    It's why I believe that it is doomed as a Party. It just becomes ever less attractive to commit your life to. As a bright young ambitious politician, you have to sign up to full-fat Corbynism to get onboard. Until 2015, it had been a niche view of the world, even in the politics of the left. But now you have a clique who still bang on about Stalin and Mao as though the past century of experimentation with their ideas had never happened. "We can still make it work!".

    Corbynism is Einstein's quote* made flesh: insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results. That's what joining the Old Guard requires. A continuation of a century of experimental failure. And the people who will suffer most in these experiments are the very people they claim to be looking out for.

    *there is some doubt if it should actually be attributed to him. But whoever, it was some smart person...

    It is rubbish because it is only true of the uninteresting minority of things we do which are completely determined. You tossed a coin and got heads? Pretty stupid to call tails next time. You applied for a job and failed? Obviously don't make the stupid mistake of ever applying for another one, then.
    There is that, and moreover ‘doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results’ is the very definition of practising to improve.
    Not the there is much likelihood of that with Corbyn.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,983
    edited September 2018

    Mr. JohnL, the incompetence and dithering of May is not something I will argue against.

    Having a man who describes Hamas as his friends, is 'present' but not 'involved' when laying a wreath at a funeral for men of dubious character (to be excessively polite), and whose followers think the way to response to Jewish fears is to accuse them of evil plotting is not a fit man to be PM.

    That's before we get onto his lunatic nationalisation plans, desire to axe Trident, standing up for Russia when they used chemical weaponry on British soil, etc etc etc.

    I'd be fascinated to know: is there a single instance of Corbyn taking the UK's side against, say, Irish terrorists? Or the Russians? Or Iran?

    Just wondering.

    Corbyn sees himself as an international socialist revolutionary, the overthrow of global capitalism and imperialism is more important to him than his own country. That is why he is close to global leaders like Maduro and Lopez Obrador and groups like Hamas Irish republican movements and countries like Iran and Russia which are most opposed to the US and Israel and the remnants of what he sees as British imperialism
  • Options
    MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 50,100
    Nigelb said:

    Ishmael_Z said:

    If the Old Guard are to let young whippersnappers into their ranks, presumably they have to have demonstrated a special level of dedication to Corbyn. You can't afford to do anything, say anything that conflicts with current thinking. Suggesting "well, Tony Blair did have SOME good ideas" or "perhaps we should consider both sides in the Israel-Palestine issue?" is instant career-death.

    It's why I believe that it is doomed as a Party. It just becomes ever less attractive to commit your life to. As a bright young ambitious politician, you have to sign up to full-fat Corbynism to get onboard. Until 2015, it had been a niche view of the world, even in the politics of the left. But now you have a clique who still bang on about Stalin and Mao as though the past century of experimentation with their ideas had never happened. "We can still make it work!".

    Corbynism is Einstein's quote* made flesh: insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results. That's what joining the Old Guard requires. A continuation of a century of experimental failure. And the people who will suffer most in these experiments are the very people they claim to be looking out for.

    *there is some doubt if it should actually be attributed to him. But whoever, it was some smart person...

    It is rubbish because it is only true of the uninteresting minority of things we do which are completely determined. You tossed a coin and got heads? Pretty stupid to call tails next time. You applied for a job and failed? Obviously don't make the stupid mistake of ever applying for another one, then.
    There is that, and moreover ‘doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results’ is the very definition of practising to improve.
    Not the there is much likelihood of that with Corbyn.
    So just how many more tens of millions of deaths do we need before you are convinced that Communism doesn't work?
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,983
    edited September 2018
    Apple self driving car fails

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-45380373
  • Options
    HYUFD said:

    Corbyn has an older team around him as most of the PLP oppose Corbynism and hard Left politics and those who back it and who hold key positions in the Shadow Cabinet ie McDonnell, Abbott, Gardiner etc tend to be those who have been with Corbyn for a long time.

    If he does become PM Corbyn would almost certainly be over 70 given the next general election is not due until 2022 and he is 69 now which would make him the oldest incoming PM since Gladstone in 1892

    Winston Churchill, 1951.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,983
    edited September 2018
    Matthew Parris 'Lose Corbyn and the Tories could be crushed'

    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/dump-corbyn-and-labour-could-crush-the-tories-36cjmdfwj
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,859
    Foxy said:

    What a depressing start to the day.

    Look at some of the May video mashes on the previous thread....if they don't raise a smile, check for a pulse....
    This is better still.

    https://twitter.com/ChrisBottaNHL/status/1035491166077235201?s=19
    Whoever is organising these occasional parade stunts deserves much, umm, respect. The sort of marketing for visiting the UK that money can’t buy.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,983

    HYUFD said:

    Corbyn has an older team around him as most of the PLP oppose Corbynism and hard Left politics and those who back it and who hold key positions in the Shadow Cabinet ie McDonnell, Abbott, Gardiner etc tend to be those who have been with Corbyn for a long time.

    If he does become PM Corbyn would almost certainly be over 70 given the next general election is not due until 2022 and he is 69 now which would make him the oldest incoming PM since Gladstone in 1892

    Winston Churchill, 1951.
    Oh that is true. Though of course Corbyn would still be older than Gladstone and Churchill when they first became PM in their 60s
  • Options
    FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,578

    Nigelb said:

    Ishmael_Z said:

    If the Old Guard are to let young whippersnappers into their ranks, presumably they have to have demonstrated a special level of dedication to Corbyn. You can't afford to do anything, say anything that conflicts with current thinking. Suggesting "well, Tony Blair did have SOME good ideas" or "perhaps we should consider both sides in the Israel-Palestine issue?" is instant career-death.

    It's why I believe that it is doomed as a Party. It just becomes ever less attractive to commit your life to. As a bright young ambitious politician, you have to sign up to full-fat Corbynism to get onboard. Until 2015, it had been a niche view of the world, even in the politics of the left. But now you have a clique who still bang on about Stalin and Mao as though the past century of experimentation with their ideas had never happened. "We can still make it work!".

    Corbynism is Einstein's quote* made flesh: insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results. That's what joining the Old Guard requires. A continuation of a century of experimental failure. And the people who will suffer most in these experiments are the very people they claim to be looking out for.

    *there is some doubt if it should actually be attributed to him. But whoever, it was some smart person...

    It is rubbish because it is only true of the uninteresting minority of things we do which are completely determined. You tossed a coin and got heads? Pretty stupid to call tails next time. You applied for a job and failed? Obviously don't make the stupid mistake of ever applying for another one, then.
    There is that, and moreover ‘doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results’ is the very definition of practising to improve.
    Not the there is much likelihood of that with Corbyn.
    So just how many more tens of millions of deaths do we need before you are convinced that Communism doesn't work?
    Er, he isn't a Communist.
  • Options
    Dr. Foxy, happy to march with hammer and sickle banners, and those of Lenin and Stalin, though...
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,181
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Corbyn has an older team around him as most of the PLP oppose Corbynism and hard Left politics and those who back it and who hold key positions in the Shadow Cabinet ie McDonnell, Abbott, Gardiner etc tend to be those who have been with Corbyn for a long time.

    If he does become PM Corbyn would almost certainly be over 70 given the next general election is not due until 2022 and he is 69 now which would make him the oldest incoming PM since Gladstone in 1892

    Winston Churchill, 1951.
    Oh that is true. Though of course Corbyn would still be older than Gladstone and Churchill when they first became PM in their 60s
    Gladstone was 58.
  • Options
    MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 50,100
    Foxy said:

    Nigelb said:

    Ishmael_Z said:

    If the Old Guard are to let young whippersnappers into their ranks, presumably they have to have demonstrated a special level of dedication to Corbyn. You can't afford to do anything, say anything that conflicts with current thinking. Suggesting "well, Tony Blair did have SOME good ideas" or "perhaps we should consider both sides in the Israel-Palestine issue?" is instant career-death.

    It's why I believe that it is doomed as a Party. It just becomes ever less attractive to commit your life to. As a bright young ambitious politician, you have to sign up to full-fat Corbynism to get onboard. Until 2015, it had been a niche view of the world, even in the politics of the left. But now you have a clique who still bang on about Stalin and Mao as though the past century of experimentation with their ideas had never happened. "We can still make it work!".

    Corbynism is Einstein's quote* made flesh: insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results. That's what joining the Old Guard requires. A continuation of a century of experimental failure. And the people who will suffer most in these experiments are the very people they claim to be looking out for.

    *there is some doubt if it should actually be attributed to him. But whoever, it was some smart person...

    It is rubbish because it is only true of the uninteresting minority of things we do which are completely determined. You tossed a coin and got heads? Pretty stupid to call tails next time. You applied for a job and failed? Obviously don't make the stupid mistake of ever applying for another one, then.
    There is that, and moreover ‘doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results’ is the very definition of practising to improve.
    Not the there is much likelihood of that with Corbyn.
    So just how many more tens of millions of deaths do we need before you are convinced that Communism doesn't work?
    Er, he isn't a Communist.
    Yet his Shadow Chancellor waves around Mao's Little Red Book in the Chamber.....
  • Options
    Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 12,985
    Foxy said:




    Er, he isn't a Communist.

    The tories like fight against what they imagine JC to be rather than what he is.
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,181

    Foxy said:

    ydoethur said:

    'by the late 1930s, he alone remained of the revered revolutionary generation. Everyone else had died naturally, been executed or exiled.'

    Molotov was still there. Indeed, still Prime Minister.

    He was of the generation but (1) he wasn't all that senior in 1917. He didn't rise to high office until the early 1920s (Pravda notwithstanding). As such, he wasn't a reputational threat to Stalin. (2) He was a Stalin protégé, so in 1937-8, was more similar in political attributes to the successor generation than Stalin's contemporaries. And (3) he was about to be purged in 1953, so while the timescale might have been different, the political dynamic was the same.
    The early revolutionaries were a very small group, so not too surprising that not many were left, particularly after the power stuggles of the Twenties.

    I am not convinced that there are a lot of lessons for the modern Labour party. Labour MPs are often first elected in the waves of 1997 onwards, so are an older generation than the Tories who were first elected in 2010 and 2015.

    There are plenty of engaged youngsters. Retirements and reselections will bring in new faces, indeed one old timer has gone this week, in Frank Field.
    Is that true about 1997? Most of those who were elected then will have been in marginals or nominally Tory seats, which have largely reverted, bar a few areas where changing demographics, political culture or boundary changes have impacted. Granted, a few have yo-yoed out and back in.

    In any case, the polls problem is with the front bench rather than the PLP as a whole.
    McDonnell was first elected in 1997, taking a seat that had been Tory for 14 years.
  • Options

    ydoethur said:

    'by the late 1930s, he alone remained of the revered revolutionary generation. Everyone else had died naturally, been executed or exiled.'

    Molotov was still there. Indeed, still Prime Minister.

    He was of the generation but (1) he wasn't all that senior in 1917. He didn't rise to high office until the early 1920s (Pravda notwithstanding). As such, he wasn't a reputational threat to Stalin. (2) He was a Stalin protégé, so in 1937-8, was more similar in political attributes to the successor generation than Stalin's contemporaries. And (3) he was about to be purged in 1953, so while the timescale might have been different, the political dynamic was the same.
    Kaganovich, Voroshilov..
    Well, ok, I missed the odd one. I'll be honest - not only was that part not the main theme of the article, it wasn't even the main theme of the introduction. I didn't research it absolutely thoroughly. As well as a full-time job and various voluntary duties, I also have a half-share in a toddler and a marriage. I generally don't start writing my Saturday pieces until 9-10pm on a Friday: apologies for the error - I should have said "the vast majority of the revered revolutionary leaders".

    The main point still stands though: Stalin's successors all got old together because sticking together was more important than renewal.
  • Options
    HYUFD said:

    Mr. JohnL, the incompetence and dithering of May is not something I will argue against.

    Having a man who describes Hamas as his friends, is 'present' but not 'involved' when laying a wreath at a funeral for men of dubious character (to be excessively polite), and whose followers think the way to response to Jewish fears is to accuse them of evil plotting is not a fit man to be PM.

    That's before we get onto his lunatic nationalisation plans, desire to axe Trident, standing up for Russia when they used chemical weaponry on British soil, etc etc etc.

    I'd be fascinated to know: is there a single instance of Corbyn taking the UK's side against, say, Irish terrorists? Or the Russians? Or Iran?

    Just wondering.

    Corbyn sees himself as an international socialist revolutionary, the overthrow of global capitalism and imperialism is more important to him than his own country. That is why he is close to global leaders like Maduro and Lopez Obrador and groups like Hamas Irish republican movements and countries like Iran and Russia which are most opposed to the US and Israel and the remnants of what he sees as British imperialism
    This is all true. The difference being that the other global leaders actually managed to do something other than making Jam. Nor are his policies remotely similar to the likes of Maduro - the manifesto was clear that we need to reshape the economy. Not overthrow...
  • Options
    ydoethur said:

    Foxy said:

    ydoethur said:

    'by the late 1930s, he alone remained of the revered revolutionary generation. Everyone else had died naturally, been executed or exiled.'

    Molotov was still there. Indeed, still Prime Minister.

    He was of the generation but (1) he wasn't all that senior in 1917. He didn't rise to high office until the early 1920s (Pravda notwithstanding). As such, he wasn't a reputational threat to Stalin. (2) He was a Stalin protégé, so in 1937-8, was more similar in political attributes to the successor generation than Stalin's contemporaries. And (3) he was about to be purged in 1953, so while the timescale might have been different, the political dynamic was the same.
    The early revolutionaries were a very small group, so not too surprising that not many were left, particularly after the power stuggles of the Twenties.

    I am not convinced that there are a lot of lessons for the modern Labour party. Labour MPs are often first elected in the waves of 1997 onwards, so are an older generation than the Tories who were first elected in 2010 and 2015.

    There are plenty of engaged youngsters. Retirements and reselections will bring in new faces, indeed one old timer has gone this week, in Frank Field.
    Is that true about 1997? Most of those who were elected then will have been in marginals or nominally Tory seats, which have largely reverted, bar a few areas where changing demographics, political culture or boundary changes have impacted. Granted, a few have yo-yoed out and back in.

    In any case, the polls problem is with the front bench rather than the PLP as a whole.
    McDonnell was first elected in 1997, taking a seat that had been Tory for 14 years.
    London is one of those areas of political cultural change.
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,181
    Dura_Ace said:

    Foxy said:




    Er, he isn't a Communist.

    The tories like fight against what they imagine JC to be rather than what he is.
    Socialism is meant to be the first step on the road to Communism in modern political theory. I am aware that it predates it but are there many Socialists who look to Robert Owen or even Tom Paine rather than Marx for inspiration now?

    Of course Socialism doesn't actually lead to Communism because it doesn't work. That's why Brezhnev's government came up with 'developed Socialism' to explain why things seemed to have ossified.

    Great Soviet joke:

    This is Armenian Radio; our listeners asked us: “We are told that the communism is already seen at the horizon.” Then, what is a horizon?”
    We’re answering: “Horizon is an imaginary line which moves away each time you approach it.”
  • Options
    ydoethur said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Corbyn has an older team around him as most of the PLP oppose Corbynism and hard Left politics and those who back it and who hold key positions in the Shadow Cabinet ie McDonnell, Abbott, Gardiner etc tend to be those who have been with Corbyn for a long time.

    If he does become PM Corbyn would almost certainly be over 70 given the next general election is not due until 2022 and he is 69 now which would make him the oldest incoming PM since Gladstone in 1892

    Winston Churchill, 1951.
    Oh that is true. Though of course Corbyn would still be older than Gladstone and Churchill when they first became PM in their 60s
    Gladstone was 58.
    The current record for a first appointment is Lord Palmerston, who was a few months over 70 in 1855. Corbyn, if elected in 2022, would beat it.
  • Options
    Ishmael_ZIshmael_Z Posts: 8,981
    Foxy said:

    Nigelb said:

    Ishmael_Z said:

    If the Old Guard are to let young whippersnappers into their ranks, presumably they have to have demonstrated a special level of dedication to Corbyn. You can't afford to do anything, say anything that conflicts with current thinking. Suggesting "well, Tony Blair did have SOME good ideas" or "perhaps we should consider both sides in the Israel-Palestine issue?" is instant career-death.

    It's why I believe that it is doomed as a Party. It just becomes ever less attractive to commit your life to. As a bright young ambitious politician, you have to sign up to full-fat Corbynism to get onboard. Until 2015, it had been a niche view of the world, even in the politics of the left. But now you have a clique who still bang on about Stalin and Mao as though the past century of experimentation with their ideas had never happened. "We can still make it work!".

    Corbynism is Einstein's quote* made flesh: insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results. That's what joining the Old Guard requires. A continuation of a century of experimental failure. And the people who will suffer most in these experiments are the very people they claim to be looking out for.

    *there is some doubt if it should actually be attributed to him. But whoever, it was some smart person...

    It is rubbish because it is only true of the uninteresting minority of things we do which are completely determined. You tossed a coin and got heads? Pretty stupid to call tails next time. You applied for a job and failed? Obviously don't make the stupid mistake of ever applying for another one, then.
    There is that, and moreover ‘doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results’ is the very definition of practising to improve.
    Not the there is much likelihood of that with Corbyn.
    So just how many more tens of millions of deaths do we need before you are convinced that Communism doesn't work?
    Er, he isn't a Communist.
    But he marches with Communists, is best mates with Communists, has never said anything expressly disavowing Communism ... haven't we heard something like this before?
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,181
    edited September 2018

    ydoethur said:

    Foxy said:

    ydoethur said:

    'by the late 1930s, he alone remained of the revered revolutionary generation. Everyone else had died naturally, been executed or exiled.'

    Molotov was still there. Indeed, still Prime Minister.

    He was of the generation but (1) he wasn't all that senior in 1917. He didn't rise to high office until the early 1920s (Pravda notwithstanding). As such, he wasn't a reputational threat to Stalin. (2) He was a Stalin protégé, so in 1937-8, was more similar in political attributes to the successor generation than Stalin's contemporaries. And (3) he was about to be purged in 1953, so while the timescale might have been different, the political dynamic was the same.
    The early revolutionaries were a very small group, so not too surprising that not many were left, particularly after the power stuggles of the Twenties.

    I am not convinced that there are a lot of lessons for the modern Labour party. Labour MPs are often first elected in the waves of 1997 onwards, so are an older generation than the Tories who were first elected in 2010 and 2015.

    There are plenty of engaged youngsters. Retirements and reselections will bring in new faces, indeed one old timer has gone this week, in Frank Field.
    Is that true about 1997? Most of those who were elected then will have been in marginals or nominally Tory seats, which have largely reverted, bar a few areas where changing demographics, political culture or boundary changes have impacted. Granted, a few have yo-yoed out and back in.

    In any case, the polls problem is with the front bench rather than the PLP as a whole.
    McDonnell was first elected in 1997, taking a seat that had been Tory for 14 years.
    London is one of those areas of political cultural change.
    And it is also fair to say that in 1983 and 1987 the key factor in the Tory win in Hayes and Harlington was a split vote. McDonnell very nearly won in 1992.
  • Options
    Freggles said:

    Long-Bailey and Pidcock incoming.
    What price Aaron Bastani getting a nice safe Labour seat next time?

    Long-Bailey has yet to establish herself with any presence or purpose.

    Pidcock, on the other hand, has established herself as someone driven by hate and a very blinkered vision of the world. Perhaps she is the anointed successor after all
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,181
    Is that a spoof?

    Or is there somebody actually crazy enough to tweet that?
  • Options
    HYUFD said:

    Matthew Parris 'Lose Corbyn and the Tories could be crushed'

    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/dump-corbyn-and-labour-could-crush-the-tories-36cjmdfwj

    As some of us on PB have been saying for months and months.

    Labour under Cooper or someone else of responsible competence would be 10 points ahead, maybe more.

    But I can't see how on earth it will happen.
  • Options
    MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 50,100

    HYUFD said:

    Matthew Parris 'Lose Corbyn and the Tories could be crushed'

    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/dump-corbyn-and-labour-could-crush-the-tories-36cjmdfwj

    As some of us on PB have been saying for months and months.

    Labour under Cooper or someone else of responsible competence would be 10 points ahead, maybe more.

    But I can't see how on earth it will happen.
    How must that make Cooper feel? She could be measuring up the curtains if it weren't for those pesky kids.....
  • Options
    SquareRootSquareRoot Posts: 7,095

    HYUFD said:

    Matthew Parris 'Lose Corbyn and the Tories could be crushed'

    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/dump-corbyn-and-labour-could-crush-the-tories-36cjmdfwj

    As some of us on PB have been saying for months and months.

    Labour under Cooper or someone else of responsible competence would be 10 points ahead, maybe more.

    But I can't see how on earth it will happen.
    Cooper isn't competent
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,181

    Freggles said:

    Long-Bailey and Pidcock incoming.
    What price Aaron Bastani getting a nice safe Labour seat next time?

    Long-Bailey has yet to establish herself with any presence or purpose.

    Pidcock, on the other hand, has established herself as someone driven by hate and a very blinkered vision of the world. Perhaps she is the anointed successor after all
    Laura Pidcock reminds me of an English teacher I once knew. Physically they have quite a close resemblance. But it's more the way they constantly have a sour look and whinge about everything. The English teacher in question used to give the impression she was doing us all a favour by turning up because she was far better than the rest of us. I wouldn't have minded that quite so much if she hadn't been a rotten teacher who always turned up five minutes after school had actually started.

    The English teacher jumped before she was pushed in the end. I wonder what will happen with Pidcock. I don't think North-West Durham is quite as safe for Labour as it once was.
  • Options

    ydoethur said:

    'by the late 1930s, he alone remained of the revered revolutionary generation. Everyone else had died naturally, been executed or exiled.'

    Molotov was still there. Indeed, still Prime Minister.

    He was of the generation but (1) he wasn't all that senior in 1917. He didn't rise to high office until the early 1920s (Pravda notwithstanding). As such, he wasn't a reputational threat to Stalin. (2) He was a Stalin protégé, so in 1937-8, was more similar in political attributes to the successor generation than Stalin's contemporaries. And (3) he was about to be purged in 1953, so while the timescale might have been different, the political dynamic was the same.
    Kaganovich, Voroshilov..
    Well, ok, I missed the odd one. I'll be honest - not only was that part not the main theme of the article, it wasn't even the main theme of the introduction. I didn't research it absolutely thoroughly. As well as a full-time job and various voluntary duties, I also have a half-share in a toddler and a marriage. I generally don't start writing my Saturday pieces until 9-10pm on a Friday: apologies for the error - I should have said "the vast majority of the revered revolutionary leaders".

    The main point still stands though: Stalin's successors all got old together because sticking together was more important than renewal.
    Hey, it's PB. The slings and arrows of pedantry are always close to hand.
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,181

    HYUFD said:

    Matthew Parris 'Lose Corbyn and the Tories could be crushed'

    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/dump-corbyn-and-labour-could-crush-the-tories-36cjmdfwj

    As some of us on PB have been saying for months and months.

    Labour under Cooper or someone else of responsible competence would be 10 points ahead, maybe more.

    But I can't see how on earth it will happen.
    Cooper isn't competent
    She doesn't need to be competent. Rather like the two men being chased by a bear, she only needs to be better than the alternative. I reckon whe could manage that comfortably.
  • Options
    Via Twitter: apparently the BBC's been referring to Marcus Ericsson as Magnus. And his Sauber as a Soober. Or Sorber.

    Few years ago they had BAFTA-winning coverage of the whole season.

    Still, it's not like they threw it away to blow £30m for the concept of another identikit TV talent show which they don't even broadcast any more...
  • Options
    HYUFD said:

    Corbyn has an older team around him as most of the PLP oppose Corbynism and hard Left politics and those who back it and who hold key positions in the Shadow Cabinet ie McDonnell, Abbott, Gardiner etc tend to be those who have been with Corbyn for a long time.

    [snip]

    It's also a generational thing. His sixty-something colleagues grew up politically in the 1970s and 1980s, in a world still divided between the west and the communist states. Even if they weren't on the side of the Soviets or Chinese, they certainly had an ambivalence about the west and romanticised the communist countries. That gave body to the certainties of their ideology.

    The next generation however - those now in their mid-/late-forties and fifties - not only witnessed the collapse of the USSR and the Eastern European dictatorships, of China turning capitalist (albeit state-capitalism), and the abject failures of the economic and political models they represented, but they also moved into front-line politics in the 1990s - the time of Blair, Clinton, Schroeder and all the Third Way centrism, which not only delivered some real practical benefits but was electorally successful too.

    However, the generation beyond - those now in their thirties - don't remember the old Cold War but do take as a reference point 2008 and the 'failure of capitalism'. For them, Blair was not only a sell-out but pedalled policies that brought on the crash, unemployment and the rest - and political defeat in 2010 into the bargain. Hence the renewed self-confidence in leftism.

    But they'll have to wait: Corbyn isn't going to sack his ideological allies so they'll go only in their own good time.
  • Options

    HYUFD said:

    Matthew Parris 'Lose Corbyn and the Tories could be crushed'

    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/dump-corbyn-and-labour-could-crush-the-tories-36cjmdfwj

    As some of us on PB have been saying for months and months.

    Labour under Cooper or someone else of responsible competence would be 10 points ahead, maybe more.

    But I can't see how on earth it will happen.
    Cooper isn't competent
    Competence is relative. Compared to Corbyn she's got the wisdom of Solomon.
  • Options

    ydoethur said:

    'by the late 1930s, he alone remained of the revered revolutionary generation. Everyone else had died naturally, been executed or exiled.'

    Molotov was still there. Indeed, still Prime Minister.

    He was of the generation but (1) he wasn't all that senior in 1917. He didn't rise to high office until the early 1920s (Pravda notwithstanding). As such, he wasn't a reputational threat to Stalin. (2) He was a Stalin protégé, so in 1937-8, was more similar in political attributes to the successor generation than Stalin's contemporaries. And (3) he was about to be purged in 1953, so while the timescale might have been different, the political dynamic was the same.
    Kaganovich, Voroshilov..
    Well, ok, I missed the odd one. I'll be honest - not only was that part not the main theme of the article, it wasn't even the main theme of the introduction. I didn't research it absolutely thoroughly. As well as a full-time job and various voluntary duties, I also have a half-share in a toddler and a marriage. I generally don't start writing my Saturday pieces until 9-10pm on a Friday: apologies for the error - I should have said "the vast majority of the revered revolutionary leaders".

    The main point still stands though: Stalin's successors all got old together because sticking together was more important than renewal.
    Hey, it's PB. The slings and arrows of pedantry are always close to hand.
    'Tis true - and one reason I love it.

    Have to go now - a kids' party to plan. Have fun, all.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,983
    edited September 2018

    HYUFD said:

    Matthew Parris 'Lose Corbyn and the Tories could be crushed'

    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/dump-corbyn-and-labour-could-crush-the-tories-36cjmdfwj

    As some of us on PB have been saying for months and months.

    Labour under Cooper or someone else of responsible competence would be 10 points ahead, maybe more.

    But I can't see how on earth it will happen.
    I am suspicious of the article. For starters the left would be less united behind Labour without Corbyn with some drifting to the Greens or staying at home if he was replaced by a centrist. While most Tory voters are now Leavers and few of them would switch to Labour under a centrist anti Brexit leader either and the LDs are still polling 10% at most so not much to squeeze there either.

    Plus Cooper never polled that well with the the public anyway
  • Options
    YBarddCwscYBarddCwsc Posts: 7,172

    HYUFD said:

    Matthew Parris 'Lose Corbyn and the Tories could be crushed'

    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/dump-corbyn-and-labour-could-crush-the-tories-36cjmdfwj

    As some of us on PB have been saying for months and months.

    Labour under Cooper or someone else of responsible competence would be 10 points ahead, maybe more.

    But I can't see how on earth it will happen.
    I don't think this is correct.

    Cooper most importantly doesn't even want the job.

    She went on vacation with her family when Jeremy was campaigning in the first leadership election.

    If you are ambivalent about leading the Labour Party (or any political party), then you won't end up as leader.

    The ambition, the drooling hunger for power has to be there.

    Yvette doesn't have it.

    (She has other defects as well, like lack of ideas & vision, but that isn't fatal to leadership ambitions.)


  • Options
    Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 12,985
    ydoethur said:



    Great Soviet joke:

    This is Armenian Radio; our listeners asked us: “We are told that the communism is already seen at the horizon.” Then, what is a horizon?”
    We’re answering: “Horizon is an imaginary line which moves away each time you approach it.”

    Radio Yerevan Jokes occupy a niche in Russian culture roughly analogous to knock knock jokes in British culture.

    Our listeners ask: will there be theft under communism?

    Radio Yerevan answers: no, everything will already have been stolen under socialism.

    There actually was, and perhaps still is for all I know, a regular Q&A feature on Radio Yerevan but it wasn't remotely amusing apparently.
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,181
    I am starting to wonder if the SNP could formally split over this.

    Egoism is a much bigger force in political division than most people realise. Sure, you have the odd split more or less purely over policy - Corn Laws in 1845-6, the Liberals in 1886, the SDP in 1981 - but they're far outweighed by the splits over outsize egos. Lloyd George (twice) Rosebery, Joseph Chamberlain in 1903, John Simon in 1931, possibly Blair and Brown, Grenville and Pitt in 1804. The Irish Nationalists over Parnell perhaps could be included.

    Of all the bizarre ways that the independence movement in Scotland could fizzle out however, I never thought it could have been something like this.
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,181
    Dura_Ace said:

    ydoethur said:



    Great Soviet joke:

    This is Armenian Radio; our listeners asked us: “We are told that the communism is already seen at the horizon.” Then, what is a horizon?”
    We’re answering: “Horizon is an imaginary line which moves away each time you approach it.”

    Radio Yerevan Jokes occupy a niche in Russian culture roughly analogous to knock knock jokes in British culture.

    Our listeners ask: will there be theft under communism?

    Radio Yerevan answers: no, everything will already have been stolen under socialism.

    There actually was, and perhaps still is for all I know, a regular Q&A feature on Radio Yerevan but it wasn't remotely amusing apparently.
    This is Radio Yerevan. We apologise for having been off air. There had to be some staffing changes. When the last announcer was saying 'Socialism is nothing as compared to Communism,' he left too long a pause after the word 'nothing.'
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,983

    HYUFD said:

    Corbyn has an older team around him as most of the PLP oppose Corbynism and hard Left politics and those who back it and who hold key positions in the Shadow Cabinet ie McDonnell, Abbott, Gardiner etc tend to be those who have been with Corbyn for a long time.

    [snip]

    It's also a generational thing. His sixty-something colleagues grew up politically in the 1970s and 1980s, in a world still divided between the west and the communist states. Even if they weren't on the side of the Soviets or Chinese, they certainly had an ambivalence about the west and romanticised the communist countries. That gave body to the certainties of their ideology.

    The next generation however - those now in their mid-/late-forties and fifties - not only witnessed the collapse of the USSR and the Eastern European dictatorships, of China turning capitalist (albeit state-capitalism), and the abject failures of the economic and political models they represented, but they also moved into front-line politics in the 1990s - the time of Blair, Clinton, Schroeder and all the Third Way centrism, which not only delivered some real practical benefits but was electorally successful too.

    However, the generation beyond - those now in their thirties - don't remember the old Cold War but do take as a reference point 2008 and the 'failure of capitalism'. For them, Blair was not only a sell-out but pedalled policies that brought on the crash, unemployment and the rest - and political defeat in 2010 into the bargain. Hence the renewed self-confidence in leftism.

    But they'll have to wait: Corbyn isn't going to sack his ideological allies so they'll go only in their own good time.
    Corbyn is part of a generation of hard Left pensioner Labour leaders leading a party whose largest voting block comes from young under 40s
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,859

    Good morning, everyone.

    Quite curious to see what the weather is in Milan (for the race).

    Let us hope we don't find out what it's like when a cabal of elderly far left fools get into power.

    Weather in Milan is currently wet and drizzly, GP3 race about to start on wet tyres.

    Forecast was to be dry today and tomorrow, so Italian weather forecasts are as accurate as British or Belgian ones.
  • Options
    YBarddCwscYBarddCwsc Posts: 7,172
    Dura_Ace said:

    ydoethur said:



    Great Soviet joke:

    This is Armenian Radio; our listeners asked us: “We are told that the communism is already seen at the horizon.” Then, what is a horizon?”
    We’re answering: “Horizon is an imaginary line which moves away each time you approach it.”

    Radio Yerevan Jokes occupy a niche in Russian culture roughly analogous to knock knock jokes in British culture.

    Our listeners ask: will there be theft under communism?

    Radio Yerevan answers: no, everything will already have been stolen under socialism.

    There actually was, and perhaps still is for all I know, a regular Q&A feature on Radio Yerevan but it wasn't remotely amusing apparently.
    It would be interesting to have a perspective from Scotland on this.

    From my admittedly partial information, it seems as though Nicola Sturgeon has behaved correctly.
  • Options

    HYUFD said:

    Matthew Parris 'Lose Corbyn and the Tories could be crushed'

    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/dump-corbyn-and-labour-could-crush-the-tories-36cjmdfwj

    As some of us on PB have been saying for months and months.

    Labour under Cooper or someone else of responsible competence would be 10 points ahead, maybe more.

    But I can't see how on earth it will happen.
    I don't think this is correct.

    Cooper most importantly doesn't even want the job.

    She went on vacation with her family when Jeremy was campaigning in the first leadership election.

    If you are ambivalent about leading the Labour Party (or any political party), then you won't end up as leader.

    The ambition, the drooling hunger for power has to be there.

    Yvette doesn't have it.

    (She has other defects as well, like lack of ideas & vision, but that isn't fatal to leadership ambitions.)


    Parris picked her, he writes, mainly because he thought his non-political readers may actually have heard of her. She would make a decent fist of the job. He did list some other shadow cabinet names as well.

This discussion has been closed.