polling shows that Mr Corbyn’s personal ratings have dropped sharply. A YouGov poll of 1,662 people for The Times reveals that the proportion of those who say he is doing “badly” has jumped by 19 points since December 19-20 to 56 per cent, with the proportion who say he is doing “well” down 14 to 31 per cent.
Not sure I agree with the premise. If you look at the US there was a time when Democrats and Republicans seemed almost interchangeable. Now they talk past each other in a conversation of the deaf. And any attempt to create a more centrist force has failed. Why should we not go the same way?
I see our politics becoming ever more bipolar It’s not good but there are a series of forces pushing us that way. The extremes push potential leaders out to appeal to them and contempt for the other does likewise. The great British public may eventually call time on this but there is no sign of them doing so to date.
I agree. I don’t think there is a void to be filled. Or rather, they may well be further apart and more stridently so, but there’s pro not seem many around to fill the gap. From what I can see people like the certainty of polarisation, that is shown by the response to more extreme positions and more aggressive tones being, well, higher poll ratings. I’m not a fan of that, but even so i get caught up in it as well, and it seems most general voters hold no such reservations. It’s no good to assume they are crying out for centrism even if that is what they say they want - what action do they take, what electoral action?
You have to stand for something, not just against something. No one in the centre is clear what they are standing for.
take away Brexit and the Tories are also struggling. Indeed who anywhere has the answer as to what alternative(s) there might be to our disfunctional semi-oligarchic capitalism (other than unattractive tyranny)?
I agree. All the Brexit headbangers who will enthusiastically agree with my first post will recoil in horror at the idea that Brexit has demolished traditional Conservatism. But it has.
Absolutely. The Tory party has always existed to oppose radical change. And protect economic stability. They are astray from failing to recognise that Brexit will be a radical change, and will risk the economy - because of their strong desire to reverse a decision taken in history, and take a different path. But history doesn't work like that, and cutting across country to try and find that alternative path is far from easy.
You mistake the purpose of the Conservative party. They do not exist to oppose radical change. They exist to act as a brake on the ambitions of politicians (not quite the same thing.
Given the path the EU is (and needs to) take leaving is a profoundly conservative thing to do.
If the Lib Dems want to get a massive headline in the coming weeks, they could probably do a lot worse than send a delegation to have a polite chat with Ms Debonnaire this weekend...
Not convinced that Labour will turn quickly. Reading the latest on NEC trying to block action against jew haters it seems to me it will take years, maybe even decades for the party to return to moderate control. And they haven't even started. Far from it.
Is "jew haters" the new, officially approved term for use by Tory astroturfers after I wondered a couple of threads back if people generally understand what anti-semitism means?
And as I replied, I doubt Corbyn understands what antisemitism means either. How else to explain the mess he and the party have got into over it?
And after our discussion, a new term emerges. Coincidence?
You are being a little silly. If Labour spent less time fretting about 'Tory astroturfers' (real and imagined), and more time on sorting itself out, then it would not be in this mess.
But Corbyn evidently doesn't want to sort it out. After all, he's had plenty of opportunities.
To be fair it is mainly Tories or Tory Astroturfers on here.
“QUEEN ELIZABETH must claim her right to rule Muslims.” So ran a recent headline on the Arab Atheist Network, a web forum. It was only partly in jest. According to reports from Casablanca to Karachi, the British monarch is descended from the Prophet Muhammad, making her a cousin of the kings of Morocco and Jordan, not to mention of Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Iran’s Supreme Leader.
The claim, first made many years ago, is gathering renewed interest in the Middle East. Why is not clear, but in March a Moroccan newspaper called Al-Ousboue traced the queen’s lineage back 43 generations.
The Queen - as anyone else - has more than 10 trillion 41-greats grandparents. Even allowing for royal intermarriage, it would be surprising if none of them was Mohammed.
I’ll trust your figures, although I suppose with royals the only difference is unlike most it is easier to track back, assuming everyone was sired by who it is recorded they were. But we’re all cousins eventually,
I was present at the demonstration in Parliament Square two weeks ago called by Jewish groups to express their anxieties as to the perceived anti-Jewish feeling in elements of her Majesties loyal Opposition (and by definition potentially the next government). I m not a natural protester; I am a semi-retired 67 year old professional. The demonstration, called at less than 24 hours notice, brought some 2000 very atypical political protesters...predominantly mild aged, wearing suits and ties, and overwhelmingly feeling a level of anxiety at our position as loyal British Jews, of a type which none of has ever experienced in our lifetime. I can honestly say that in quite a high profile professional career, I have never experienced antisemitism. I have personal friends who are of all faiths and none, and of a whole variety of racial backgrounds. But what is perceived to be going on under Mr Corbyn's watch is quite frightening to us. British Jews have always been a tiny minority of the population, but have always tried to punch above their weight in British Society, in the professions, the arts, science, academia, philanthropy and their dearest collective wish is to be allowed to continue to contribute in our usual low-key, unobtrusive way.
We were most grateful for the labour MPs who came to lend their support, and also, and totally unreported in the press, at least two senior (non-Jewish) Conservative MPs.
Thank you. I for one hope that the Jewish community in Britain will continue to flourish, prosper and contribute and not be scared by those with malevolent views towards it.
I was present at the demonstration in Parliament Square two weeks ago called by Jewish groups to express their anxieties as to the perceived anti-Jewish feeling in elements of her Majesties loyal Opposition (and by definition potentially the next government). I m not a natural protester; I am a semi-retired 67 year old professional. The demonstration, called at less than 24 hours notice, brought some 2000 very atypical political protesters...predominantly mild aged, wearing suits and ties, and overwhelmingly feeling a level of anxiety at our position as loyal British Jews, of a type which none of has ever experienced in our lifetime. I can honestly say that in quite a high profile professional career, I have never experienced antisemitism. I have personal friends who are of all faiths and none, and of a whole variety of racial backgrounds. But what is perceived to be going on under Mr Corbyn's watch is quite frightening to us. British Jews have always been a tiny minority of the population, but have always tried to punch above their weight in British Society, in the professions, the arts, science, academia, philanthropy and their dearest collective wish is to be allowed to continue to contribute in our usual low-key, unobtrusive way.
We were most grateful for the labour MPs who came to lend their support, and also, and totally unreported in the press, at least two senior (non-Jewish) Conservative MPs.
Thank you. I for one hope that the Jewish community in Britain will continue to flourish, prosper and contribute and not be scared by those with malevolent views towards it.
“QUEEN ELIZABETH must claim her right to rule Muslims.” So ran a recent headline on the Arab Atheist Network, a web forum. It was only partly in jest. According to reports from Casablanca to Karachi, the British monarch is descended from the Prophet Muhammad, making her a cousin of the kings of Morocco and Jordan, not to mention of Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Iran’s Supreme Leader.
The claim, first made many years ago, is gathering renewed interest in the Middle East. Why is not clear, but in March a Moroccan newspaper called Al-Ousboue traced the queen’s lineage back 43 generations.
The Queen - as anyone else - has more than 10 trillion 41-greats grandparents. Even allowing for royal intermarriage, it would be surprising if none of them was Mohammed.
Mohammed is a common ancestor of virtually all European royalty and nobility.
If the Lib Dems want to get a massive headline in the coming weeks, they could probably do a lot worse than send a delegation to have a polite chat with Ms Debonnaire this weekend...
She took the green vote and had a corbynites surge to a gigantic majority. Notwithstanding all the other barriers to her being receptive to such a chat, she’d have no chance in that seat in future as a ld (even though they held it not long ago)
The European leader of the Jews has said today that if Corbyn became Prime Minister Jews would flee the UK.
Can we really imagine that in todays multicultural society a leader of a community would express views not heard of since WW2
G, that sounds like claptrap to me, he sounds much worse than the anti-semites to me. Hopefully he is at the head of any queue leaving. Sounds a bit like those thick pop stars that claim they will leave if taxes go up but never do.
Morning Malc - I do not think we should have that attitude to any part of our society. Whether you are a Christian, Jew, Muslim, all faiths and none, you should be welcome in our Country and no one should be driven out by fear or hatred
Centrists have been running their politics on the assumptions of the 1990s for a long time. That was already out-of-date by the time of the credit crunch, and they've looked increasingly confused and disorientated as the events of this decade have proceeded.
So far, their answer has been to either blame the voters or blame manipulation of the voters. The voters notice this, tune out anything else they say as patronising or condescending, and then look for leadership elsewhere that respects them, and their views and wishes. In May and Corbyn, in two very different ways, they see leaders that do, or at least try to do.
Until politicians like Blair, Clegg, and Osborne - or the generation who succeed them - can adjust to the new reality and make a inspired and positive case for their form of politics that's relevant to, and respects, the voters they are condemned to remain in the wilderness.
polling shows that Mr Corbyn’s personal ratings have dropped sharply. A YouGov poll of 1,662 people for The Times reveals that the proportion of those who say he is doing “badly” has jumped by 19 points since December 19-20 to 56 per cent, with the proportion who say he is doing “well” down 14 to 31 per cent.
Not sure I agree with the premise. If you look at the US there was a time when Democrats and Republicans seemed almost interchangeable. Now they talk past each other in a conversation of the deaf. And any attempt to create a more centrist force has failed. Why should we not go the same way?
I see our politics becoming ever more bipolar It’s not good but there are a series of forces pushing us that way. The extremes push potential leaders out to appeal to them and contempt for the other does likewise. The great British public may eventually call time on this but there is no sign of them doing so to date.
I agree. I don’t think there is a void to be filled. Or rather, they may well be further apart and more stridently so, but there’s pro not seem many around to fill the gap. From what I can see people like the certainty of polarisation, that is shown by the response to more extreme positions and more aggressive tones being, well, higher poll ratings. I’m not a fan of that, but even so i get caught up in it as well, and it seems most general voters hold no such reservations. It’s no good to assume they are crying out for centrism even if that is what they say they want - what action do they take, what electoral action?
I expect the local elections will have something for everyone.
“QUEEN ELIZABETH must claim her right to rule Muslims.” So ran a recent headline on the Arab Atheist Network, a web forum. It was only partly in jest. According to reports from Casablanca to Karachi, the British monarch is descended from the Prophet Muhammad, making her a cousin of the kings of Morocco and Jordan, not to mention of Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Iran’s Supreme Leader.
The claim, first made many years ago, is gathering renewed interest in the Middle East. Why is not clear, but in March a Moroccan newspaper called Al-Ousboue traced the queen’s lineage back 43 generations.
The Queen - as anyone else - has more than 10 trillion 41-greats grandparents. Even allowing for royal intermarriage, it would be surprising if none of them was Mohammed.
Mohammed is a common ancestor of virtually all European royalty and nobility.
So Charles has a perfectly valid excuse to make Mohammed his regnal name.
You have to stand for something, not just against something. No one in the centre is clear what they are standing for.
take away Brexit and the Tories are also struggling. Indeed who anywhere has the answer as to what alternative(s) there might be to our disfunctional semi-oligarchic capitalism (other than unattractive tyranny)?
I agree. All the Brexit headbangers who will enthusiastically agree with my first post will recoil in horror at the idea that Brexit has demolished traditional Conservatism. But it has.
Absolutely. The Tory party has always existed to oppose radical change. And protect economic stability. They are astray from failing to recognise that Brexit will be a radical change, and will risk the economy - because of their strong desire to reverse a decision taken in history, and take a different path. But history doesn't work like that, and cutting across country to try and find that alternative path is far from easy.
You mistake the purpose of the Conservative party. They do not exist to oppose radical change. They exist to act as a brake on the ambitions of politicians (not quite the same thing.
Given the path the EU is (and needs to) take leaving is a profoundly conservative thing to do.
The Conservative Party embraces more radical policy when it becomes electorally necessary to do so, or when it must pursue it to preserve one of its fundamental principles.
The Conservative Party was radical over electoral reform in the 1860s, imperial reform in the 1930s, over monetarism in the 1980s, and now over Brexit.
The idea that traditional Conservatism is dead is a nonsense.
As ever the twitter thread on his preceding point can be a hoot. One person describing the previous result as ‘BNP, BlueBNP, Labour and PurpleBNP ’. Nuanced. Or a good joke. Either way a hoot.
polling shows that Mr Corbyn’s personal ratings have dropped sharply. A YouGov poll of 1,662 people for The Times reveals that the proportion of those who say he is doing “badly” has jumped by 19 points since December 19-20 to 56 per cent, with the proportion who say he is doing “well” down 14 to 31 per cent.
Whilst the headline figures show virtually no change, that's a very significant movement on Corbyn's personal ratings, which should tell over time.
polling shows that Mr Corbyn’s personal ratings have dropped sharply. A YouGov poll of 1,662 people for The Times reveals that the proportion of those who say he is doing “badly” has jumped by 19 points since December 19-20 to 56 per cent, with the proportion who say he is doing “well” down 14 to 31 per cent.
Whilst the headline figures show virtually no change, that's a very significant movement on Corbyn's personal ratings, which should tell over time.
If it is sustained. And should it tell? He’s surely had some terrible ratings before, if not so much in the past year.
Looking at the virtual static nature of the polls but today's news of Corbyn's falling ratings it does seem that this is a demonstration of labour's dilemma. Labour supporters loyalty to their brand is unwavering but they are caught in a crisis between a leader who is divisive to many but the moderates are not at this stage prepared to do anything tangible to address the issue that their leader is unacceptable to them
They are a party at war with itself and there is no sign of this being resolved anytime soon. In the event that we start seeing deselection that must be the time for the PLP to rebel and resign the whip and form their own party on the benches. If it was organised properly up to 100 MP's could be part of a new movement and with 4 years to the next election they could establish themselves as a centre left party acceptable to many
Not convinced that Labour will turn quickly. Reading the latest on NEC trying to block action against jew haters it seems to me it will take years, maybe even decades for the party to return to moderate control. And they haven't even started. Far from it.
Is "jew haters" the new, officially approved term for use by Tory astroturfers after I wondered a couple of threads back if people generally understand what anti-semitism means?
And as I replied, I doubt Corbyn understands what antisemitism means either. How else to explain the mess he and the party have got into over it?
And after our discussion, a new term emerges. Coincidence?
You are being a little silly. If Labour spent less time fretting about 'Tory astroturfers' (real and imagined), and more time on sorting itself out, then it would not be in this mess.
But Corbyn evidently doesn't want to sort it out. After all, he's had plenty of opportunities.
The European leader of the Jews has said today that if Corbyn became Prime Minister Jews would flee the UK.
Can we really imagine that in todays multicultural society a leader of a community would express views not heard of since WW2
G, that sounds like claptrap to me, he sounds much worse than the anti-semites to me. Hopefully he is at the head of any queue leaving. Sounds a bit like those thick pop stars that claim they will leave if taxes go up but never do.
It’s not claptrap. Look at what’s happened to the Jewish community in France in recent years. Anti-semitism is a virus. If it’s allowed to take hold it spreads and harms the host body. That is what is happening to Labour, if action is not taken. Given Jewish history in living memory on this continent I am not surprised some Jews are fearful. It is what I have heard from Jewish friends of mine.
“QUEEN ELIZABETH must claim her right to rule Muslims.” So ran a recent headline on the Arab Atheist Network, a web forum. It was only partly in jest. According to reports from Casablanca to Karachi, the British monarch is descended from the Prophet Muhammad, making her a cousin of the kings of Morocco and Jordan, not to mention of Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Iran’s Supreme Leader.
The claim, first made many years ago, is gathering renewed interest in the Middle East. Why is not clear, but in March a Moroccan newspaper called Al-Ousboue traced the queen’s lineage back 43 generations.
The Queen - as anyone else - has more than 10 trillion 41-greats grandparents. Even allowing for royal intermarriage, it would be surprising if none of them was Mohammed.
Mohammed is a common ancestor of virtually all European royalty and nobility.
So Charles has a perfectly valid excuse to make Mohammed his regnal name.
The European leader of the Jews has said today that if Corbyn became Prime Minister Jews would flee the UK.
Can we really imagine that in todays multicultural society a leader of a community would express views not heard of since WW2
G, that sounds like claptrap to me, he sounds much worse than the anti-semites to me. Hopefully he is at the head of any queue leaving. Sounds a bit like those thick pop stars that claim they will leave if taxes go up but never do.
Morning Malc - I do not think we should have that attitude to any part of our society. Whether you are a Christian, Jew, Muslim, all faiths and none, you should be welcome in our Country and no one should be driven out by fear or hatred
For sure G , but I think it is mince, there may well be some hatred in the south east but I have never seen or heard anything in my life and people like this joining the band wagon and trying to fan the flames is not helpful.
Not convinced that Labour will turn quickly. Reading the latest on NEC trying to block action against jew haters it seems to me it will take years, maybe even decades for the party to return to moderate control. And they haven't even started. Far from it.
Is "jew haters" the new, officially approved term for use by Tory astroturfers after I wondered a couple of threads back if people generally understand what anti-semitism means?
And as I replied, I doubt Corbyn understands what antisemitism means either. How else to explain the mess he and the party have got into over it?
And after our discussion, a new term emerges. Coincidence?
You are being a little silly. If Labour spent less time fretting about 'Tory astroturfers' (real and imagined), and more time on sorting itself out, then it would not be in this mess.
But Corbyn evidently doesn't want to sort it out. After all, he's had plenty of opportunities.
To be fair it is mainly Tories or Tory Astroturfers on here.
Looking at the virtual static nature of the polls but today's news of Corbyn's falling ratings it does seem that this is a demonstration of labour's dilemma. Labour supporters loyalty to their brand is unwavering but they are caught in a crisis between a leader who is divisive to many but the moderates are not at this stage prepared to do anything tangible to address the issue that their leader is unacceptable to them
They are a party at war with itself and there is no sign of this being resolved anytime soon. In the event that we start seeing deselection that must be the time for the PLP to rebel and resign the whip and form their own party on the benches. If it was organised properly up to 100 MP's could be part of a new movement and with 4 years to the next election they could establish themselves as a centre left party acceptable to many
Anyone splitting off would presumably have to accept a short to medium term of Tories being in charge, and accept that as a price worth paying to establish a new centreleft force. As you point out though, the loyalty to the brand is unwavering, and all indications are that a Corbyn government is seen as a price worth paying to stop the Tories. Plus the members and the voters certainly seem to see it that way.
So is it really much of a dilemma? A whole bunch of MPs don’t like Corbyn, and a noisy minority of members don’t either. The moderates post ge seem to have accepted the state of play, though recent events have led to some more grumbling, and that’s the resolution to their dilemma - grumble when you can, then pull together at election time. Problems in the ranks once in power is a problem for another day.
Not convinced that Labour will turn quickly. Reading the latest on NEC trying to block action against jew haters it seems to me it will take years, maybe even decades for the party to return to moderate control. And they haven't even started. Far from it.
Is "jew haters" the new, officially approved term for use by Tory astroturfers after I wondered a couple of threads back if people generally understand what anti-semitism means?
And as I replied, I doubt Corbyn understands what antisemitism means either. How else to explain the mess he and the party have got into over it?
And after our discussion, a new term emerges. Coincidence?
You are being a little silly. If Labour spent less time fretting about 'Tory astroturfers' (real and imagined), and more time on sorting itself out, then it would not be in this mess.
But Corbyn evidently doesn't want to sort it out. After all, he's had plenty of opportunities.
The European leader of the Jews has said today that if Corbyn became Prime Minister Jews would flee the UK.
Can we really imagine that in todays multicultural society a leader of a community would express views not heard of since WW2
G, that sounds like claptrap to me, he sounds much worse than the anti-semites to me. Hopefully he is at the head of any queue leaving. Sounds a bit like those thick pop stars that claim they will leave if taxes go up but never do.
It’s not claptrap. Look at what’s happened to the Jewish community in France in recent years. Anti-semitism is a virus. If it’s allowed to take hold it spreads and harms the host body. That is what is happening to Labour, if action is not taken. Given Jewish history in living memory on this continent I am not surprised some Jews are fearful. It is what I have heard from Jewish friends of mine.
I personally have never seen or heard anything of the sort. It will be a south east England issue as ever and overblown as usual by the snowflakes down there. Regardless this guy coming out with rubbish like that does not help anything , only helps the perpetrators. If anyone is being threatened , where are the police.
Not convinced that Labour will turn quickly. Reading the latest on NEC trying to block action against jew haters it seems to me it will take years, maybe even decades for the party to return to moderate control. And they haven't even started. Far from it.
Is "jew haters" the new, officially approved term for use by Tory astroturfers after I wondered a couple of threads back if people generally understand what anti-semitism means?
And as I replied, I doubt Corbyn understands what antisemitism means either. How else to explain the mess he and the party have got into over it?
And after our discussion, a new term emerges. Coincidence?
You are being a little silly. If Labour spent less time fretting about 'Tory astroturfers' (real and imagined), and more time on sorting itself out, then it would not be in this mess.
But Corbyn evidently doesn't want to sort it out. After all, he's had plenty of opportunities.
To be fair it is mainly Tories or Tory Astroturfers on here.
As ever the twitter thread on his preceding point can be a hoot. One person describing the previous result as ‘BNP, BlueBNP, Labour and PurpleBNP ’. Nuanced. Or a good joke. Either way a hoot.
Reading on Twitter that the Queen's also descended from Zeus and Odin.
I recall hearing that once you trace back, in convoluted fashion, into the Anglo Saxon kings, there is supposed to be lineage from Woden, who i assume is Odin by another name, so makes sense to me.
Reading on Twitter that the Queen's also descended from Zeus and Odin.
Odin yes. Almost all Anglo-Saxon kings were descendants of his. After the Wuffingas converted to Christianity, they also traced their descent back to Abraham.
polling shows that Mr Corbyn’s personal ratings have dropped sharply. A YouGov poll of 1,662 people for The Times reveals that the proportion of those who say he is doing “badly” has jumped by 19 points since December 19-20 to 56 per cent, with the proportion who say he is doing “well” down 14 to 31 per cent.
Whilst the headline figures show virtually no change, that's a very significant movement on Corbyn's personal ratings, which should tell over time.
If it is sustained. And should it tell? He’s surely had some terrible ratings before, if not so much in the past year.
Come election time, ratings on the best candidate for Prime Minister has an effect particularly in key marginals.
Reading on Twitter that the Queen's also descended from Zeus and Odin.
Odin yes. Almost all Anglo-Saxon kings were descendants of his. After the Wuffingas converted to Christianity, they also traced their descent back to Abraham.
Zeus, I'm not so sure about.
Zeus put it about so much I should we’re all descendants.
Liberalism is an idea including concepts such as individual freedoms and responsibilities, civil rights, democracy, objective regulation, the rule of law, international cooperation, respect for others, personal aspiration and moral unity. It's an idea that has been under attack in recent years because the total wars of the twentieth century are no longer seen as awful counter examples and because the West of the post-War liberal ascendancy is seen as weak against new threats and powerful autocracies. Liberalism is associated with a capitalist system that rewarded parasitic bankers but saddled ordinary people with huge debts and with a globalisation that left people and communities behind. New movements such as Trump and Brexit pay lip service to some liberal ideas while intending to subvert them.
There's a case to be made for liberalism, but the case does actually need to be made by explaining why these principles are valuable.
Reading on Twitter that the Queen's also descended from Zeus and Odin.
Odin yes. Almost all Anglo-Saxon kings were descendants of his. After the Wuffingas converted to Christianity, they also traced their descent back to Abraham.
Zeus, I'm not so sure about.
Zeus put it about so much I should we’re all descendants.
He may have been a god to you but he was no Zeus at all to the Anglo Saxons.
Liberalism is an idea including concepts such as individual freedoms and responsibilities, civil rights, democracy, objective regulation, the rule of law, international cooperation, respect for others, personal aspiration and moral unity. It's an idea that has been under attack in recent years because the total wars of the twentieth century are no longer seen as awful counter examples and because the West of the post-War liberal ascendancy is seen as weak against new threats and powerful autocracies. Liberalism is associated with a capitalist system that rewarded parasitic bankers but saddled ordinary people with huge debts and with a globalisation that left people and communities behind. New movements such as Trump and Brexit pay lip service to some liberal ideas while intending to subvert them.
There's a case to be made for liberalism, but the case does actually need to be made by explaining why these principles are valuable.
No Westminster party has any connection with those values , hence why the country is in such a mess.
Liberalism is an idea including concepts such as individual freedoms and responsibilities, civil rights, democracy, objective regulation, the rule of law, international cooperation, respect for others, personal aspiration and moral unity. It's an idea that has been under attack in recent years because the total wars of the twentieth century are no longer seen as awful counter examples and because the West of the post-War liberal ascendancy is seen as weak against new threats and powerful autocracies. Liberalism is associated with a capitalist system that rewarded parasitic bankers but saddled ordinary people with huge debts and with a globalisation that left people and communities behind. New movements such as Trump and Brexit pay lip service to some liberal ideas while intending to subvert them.
There's a case to be made for liberalism, but the case does actually need to be made by explaining why these principles are valuable.
I don't think it's liberalism that is done for but liberal fundamentalism. The notion of the 'radical centre' was a bit of a giveaway. However you dress it up people don't tend to like too much radicalism. You also have to factor in some the internal contradictions. Being more open to a largely illiberal world, not recognising the disparities in terms of who would benefit from the increased openness.
Liberalism is an idea including concepts such as individual freedoms and responsibilities, civil rights, democracy, objective regulation, the rule of law, international cooperation, respect for others, personal aspiration and moral unity. It's an idea that has been under attack in recent years because the total wars of the twentieth century are no longer seen as awful counter examples and because the West of the post-War liberal ascendancy is seen as weak against new threats and powerful autocracies. Liberalism is associated with a capitalist system that rewarded parasitic bankers but saddled ordinary people with huge debts and with a globalisation that left people and communities behind. New movements such as Trump and Brexit pay lip service to some liberal ideas while intending to subvert them.
There's a case to be made for liberalism, but the case does actually need to be made by explaining why these principles are valuable.
"Global Britain" is a prime example of Brexit subverting liberal principles. If you are serious about a global Britain you vote Remain to stay in the international system. If you quite reasonably don't want Britain to be global you vote Leave to disconnect. Rather than proposing procedures like second referendums, liberals should be arguing for the need to be shaping the rules rather just being bound by them, that membership of formal structures is a much more effective form of international cooperation than haggling with vested interests that don't align with yours and who are much more powerful than you are. If the logical conclusion of those arguments is that the UK is FAR better off as a member of the European Union, allow people to make that conclusion themselves.
Liberalism is an idea including concepts such as individual freedoms and responsibilities, civil rights, democracy, objective regulation, the rule of law, international cooperation, respect for others, personal aspiration and moral unity. It's an idea that has been under attack in recent years because the total wars of the twentieth century are no longer seen as awful counter examples and because the West of the post-War liberal ascendancy is seen as weak against new threats and powerful autocracies. Liberalism is associated with a capitalist system that rewarded parasitic bankers but saddled ordinary people with huge debts and with a globalisation that left people and communities behind. New movements such as Trump and Brexit pay lip service to some liberal ideas while intending to subvert them.
There's a case to be made for liberalism, but the case does actually need to be made by explaining why these principles are valuable.
I don't think it's liberalism that is done for but liberal fundamentalism. The notion of the 'radical centre' was a bit of a giveaway. However you dress it up people don't tend to like too much radicalism. You also have to factor in some the internal contradictions. Being more open to a largely illiberal world, not recognising the disparities in terms of who would benefit from the increased openness.
The benefits and costs of such openness have been very unevenly distributed.
Liberalism is an idea including concepts such as individual freedoms and responsibilities, civil rights, democracy, objective regulation, the rule of law, international cooperation, respect for others, personal aspiration and moral unity. It's an idea that has been under attack in recent years because the total wars of the twentieth century are no longer seen as awful counter examples and because the West of the post-War liberal ascendancy is seen as weak against new threats and powerful autocracies. Liberalism is associated with a capitalist system that rewarded parasitic bankers but saddled ordinary people with huge debts and with a globalisation that left people and communities behind. New movements such as Trump and Brexit pay lip service to some liberal ideas while intending to subvert them.
There's a case to be made for liberalism, but the case does actually need to be made by explaining why these principles are valuable.
"Global Britain" is a prime example of Brexit subverting liberal principles. If you are serious about a global Britain you vote Remain to stay in the international system. If you quite reasonably don't want Britain to be global you vote Leave to disconnect. Rather than proposing procedures like second referendums, liberals should be arguing for the need to be shaping the rules rather just being bound by them, that membership of formal structures is a much more effective form of international cooperation than haggling with vested interests that don't align with yours and who are much more powerful than you are. If the logical conclusion of those arguments is that the UK is FAR better off as a member of the European Union, allow people to make that conclusion themselves.
Which works well, until the regional group of which you are a member starts working actively against your interests and removes your right to have an opinion on what they’re doing and where they’re going. When that happens the global view of to join the global community as its 5th largest member and use your voice to lobby hard for global free trade over protectionist blocs of Nations who wish to exclude outsiders.
Liberalism is an idea including concepts such as individual freedoms and responsibilities, civil rights, democracy, objective regulation, the rule of law, international cooperation, respect for others, personal aspiration and moral unity. It's an idea that has been under attack in recent years because the total wars of the twentieth century are no longer seen as awful counter examples and because the West of the post-War liberal ascendancy is seen as weak against new threats and powerful autocracies. Liberalism is associated with a capitalist system that rewarded parasitic bankers but saddled ordinary people with huge debts and with a globalisation that left people and communities behind. New movements such as Trump and Brexit pay lip service to some liberal ideas while intending to subvert them.
There's a case to be made for liberalism, but the case does actually need to be made by explaining why these principles are valuable.
I don't think it's liberalism that is done for but liberal fundamentalism. The notion of the 'radical centre' was a bit of a giveaway. However you dress it up people don't tend to like too much radicalism. You also have to factor in some the internal contradictions. Being more open to a largely illiberal world, not recognising the disparities in terms of who would benefit from the increased openness.
Liberalism is disparaged because it has failed to answer precisely the questions you raise. People who agree with the criticisms but also think the principles are good ones are in danger of throwing the baby out with the bathwater if they don't stand firm on the principles and argue strongly for them.
Not convinced that Labour will turn quickly. Reading the latest on NEC trying to block action against jew haters it seems to me it will take years, maybe even decades for the party to return to moderate control. And they haven't even started. Far from it.
Is "jew haters" the new, officially approved term for use by Tory astroturfers after I wondered a couple of threads back if people generally understand what anti-semitism means?
And as I replied, I doubt Corbyn understands what antisemitism means either. How else to explain the mess he and the party have got into over it?
And after our discussion, a new term emerges. Coincidence?
You are being a little silly. If Labour spent less time fretting about 'Tory astroturfers' (real and imagined), and more time on sorting itself out, then it would not be in this mess.
But Corbyn evidently doesn't want to sort it out. After all, he's had plenty of opportunities.
The European leader of the Jews has said today that if Corbyn became Prime Minister Jews would flee the UK.
Can we really imagine that in todays multicultural society a leader of a community would express views not heard of since WW2
G, that sounds like claptrap to me, he sounds much worse than the anti-semites to me. Hopefully he is at the head of any queue leaving. Sounds a bit like those thick pop stars that claim they will leave if taxes go up but never do.
It’s not claptrap. Look at what’s happened to the Jewish community in France in recent years. Anti-semitism is a virus. If it’s allowed to take hold it spreads and harms the host body. That is what is happening to Labour, if action is not taken. Given Jewish history in living memory on this continent I am not surprised some Jews are fearful. It is what I have heard from Jewish friends of mine.
I personally have never seen or heard anything of the sort. It will be a south east England issue as ever and overblown as usual by the snowflakes down there. Regardless this guy coming out with rubbish like that does not help anything , only helps the perpetrators. If anyone is being threatened , where are the police.
"From day one post-Brexit, the question for Mrs May, even if it is not articulated out loud, will be: “Are you still here?” The gun goes on the succession at once."
polling shows that Mr Corbyn’s personal ratings have dropped sharply. A YouGov poll of 1,662 people for The Times reveals that the proportion of those who say he is doing “badly” has jumped by 19 points since December 19-20 to 56 per cent, with the proportion who say he is doing “well” down 14 to 31 per cent.
Alas, as I've said before, Corbyn's an anchor. Labour tribalists and the Cult won't desert the Party/him, and those rightly afraid of the bearded tit getting his hands on power can't afford to desert the Conservatives.
But how much of the electorate is represented by the Labour tribalists and the Cult? It certainly isn't 40%.
“QUEEN ELIZABETH must claim her right to rule Muslims.” So ran a recent headline on the Arab Atheist Network, a web forum. It was only partly in jest. According to reports from Casablanca to Karachi, the British monarch is descended from the Prophet Muhammad, making her a cousin of the kings of Morocco and Jordan, not to mention of Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Iran’s Supreme Leader.
The claim, first made many years ago, is gathering renewed interest in the Middle East. Why is not clear, but in March a Moroccan newspaper called Al-Ousboue traced the queen’s lineage back 43 generations.
The Queen - as anyone else - has more than 10 trillion 41-greats grandparents. Even allowing for royal intermarriage, it would be surprising if none of them was Mohammed.
Mohammed is a common ancestor of virtually all European royalty and nobility.
Yes, that doesn't surprise me. The polygamy within Islam, the variable borders between the Christian and Islamic worlds, and the tendencies for ruling classes to marry within themselves - never mind the sheer scale of the ancestry routes going back nearly one and a half millenia - would make any other outcome highly surprising.
A fine article, but I was struck by this: ...Tories being headed by an chief administrator rather than a leader.. Clearly a missing adjective, probably starting with a vowel. Admirable; incompetent; honest; overpromoted... ?
No, actually, I added "chief" afterwards. Apologies for forgetting to edit "an" to "a" for consistency.
Alas, as I've said before, Corbyn's an anchor. Labour tribalists and the Cult won't desert the Party/him, and those rightly afraid of the bearded tit getting his hands on power can't afford to desert the Conservatives.
But how much of the electorate is represented by the Labour tribalists and the Cult? It certainly isn't 40%.
Those Remainers who put their faith in Corbyn in June 2017 are watching, somewhat aghast as Brexit's Bessy Mate sits with apparrent indifference atop the Party of the Jew-haters. Might dent some enthusiasm....
Liberalism is an idea including concepts such as individual freedoms and responsibilities, civil rights, democracy, objective regulation, the rule of law, international cooperation, respect for others, personal aspiration and moral unity. It's an idea that has been under attack in recent years because the total wars of the twentieth century are no longer seen as awful counter examples and because the West of the post-War liberal ascendancy is seen as weak against new threats and powerful autocracies. Liberalism is associated with a capitalist system that rewarded parasitic bankers but saddled ordinary people with huge debts and with a globalisation that left people and communities behind. New movements such as Trump and Brexit pay lip service to some liberal ideas while intending to subvert them.
There's a case to be made for liberalism, but the case does actually need to be made by explaining why these principles are valuable.
"Global Britain" is a prime example of Brexit subverting liberal principles. If you are serious about a global Britain you vote Remain to stay in the international system. If you quite reasonably don't want Britain to be global you vote Leave to disconnect. Rather than proposing procedures like second referendums, liberals should be arguing for the need to be shaping the rules rather just being bound by them, that membership of formal structures is a much more effective form of international cooperation than haggling with vested interests that don't align with yours and who are much more powerful than you are. If the logical conclusion of those arguments is that the UK is FAR better off as a member of the European Union, allow people to make that conclusion themselves.
Which works well, until the regional group of which you are a member starts working actively against your interests and removes your right to have an opinion on what they’re doing and where they’re going. When that happens the global view of to join the global community as its 5th largest member and use your voice to lobby hard for global free trade over protectionist blocs of Nations who wish to exclude outsiders.
Delusional paranoid and illogical nonsense. The EU did not work actively against Britain's interest, an extra voice at the WTO could block but not enable free trade.
Alas, as I've said before, Corbyn's an anchor. Labour tribalists and the Cult won't desert the Party/him, and those rightly afraid of the bearded tit getting his hands on power can't afford to desert the Conservatives.
But how much of the electorate is represented by the Labour tribalists and the Cult? It certainly isn't 40%.
The Tories' poll rating is pretty reasonable given how long they've been in power. The biggest obvious risks to them winning next time would be either a UKIP or a Lib Dem revival. Neither looks remotely likely.
But I wonder if things are actually going wrong under the bonnet.
This thread suggests they are struggling to actually field a full slate of candidates for the locals.
The Tories' poll rating is pretty reasonable given how long they've been in power. The biggest obvious risks to them winning next time would be either a UKIP or a Lib Dem revival. Neither looks remotely likely.
But I wonder if things are actually going wrong under the bonnet.
This thread suggests they are struggling to actually field a full slate of candidates for the locals.
The Tories' poll rating is pretty reasonable given how long they've been in power. The biggest obvious risks to them winning next time would be either a UKIP or a Lib Dem revival. Neither looks remotely likely.
But I wonder if things are actually going wrong under the bonnet.
This thread suggests they are struggling to actually field a full slate of candidates for the locals.
Isn't every councillor in both Manchester and Barking Labour ?
Key electoral battlegrounds they aren't.
Actually neither Manchester and Barking councils have ever been key electoral battlegrounds.
Both have had continuous Labour majority control since they came into existence.
Councils like Manchester are great adverts for experimenting with voting systems at local level. More multi-member constituencies required as a starting point.
I wonder how many hand-wringing "something MUST be done" types are merrily snorting the odd line, without ever joining the dots on who supplies the demand for the drugs these youngsters are getting killed over....
Alas, as I've said before, Corbyn's an anchor. Labour tribalists and the Cult won't desert the Party/him, and those rightly afraid of the bearded tit getting his hands on power can't afford to desert the Conservatives.
But how much of the electorate is represented by the Labour tribalists and the Cult? It certainly isn't 40%.
There are many people who dislike austerity, without being members of the Cult.
You have to stand for something, not just against something. No one in the centre is clear what they are standing for.
take away Brexit and the Tories are also struggling. Indeed who anywhere has the answer as to what alternative(s) there might be to our disfunctional semi-oligarchic capitalism (other than unattractive tyranny)?
I agree. All the Brexit headbangers who will enthusiastically agree with my first post will recoil in horror at the idea that Brexit has demolished traditional Conservatism. But it has.
Absolutely. The Tory party has always existed to oppose radical change. And protect economic stability. They are astray from failing to recognise that Brexit will be a radical change, and will risk the economy - because of their strong desire to reverse a decision taken in history, and take a different path. But history doesn't work like that, and cutting across country to try and find that alternative path is far from easy.
You mistake the purpose of the Conservative party. They do not exist to oppose radical change. They exist to act as a brake on the ambitions of politicians (not quite the same thing.
Given the path the EU is (and needs to) take leaving is a profoundly conservative thing to do.
The Conservative Party embraces more radical policy when it becomes electorally necessary to do so, or when it must pursue it to preserve one of its fundamental principles.
The Conservative Party was radical over electoral reform in the 1860s, imperial reform in the 1930s, over monetarism in the 1980s, and now over Brexit.
The idea that traditional Conservatism is dead is a nonsense.
As one of the more centralising PMs of modern times, Thatcher wasn't much of a Conservative by Charles' definition.
It is, just to be clear, bollocks, but it rests on one of the best bits of textual criticism ever. You have lots of tedious stories about the quest for the holy grail, but wtf is a grail? You don't hear people offering grails of tea to one another. So you take "san greal", holy grail, and just move the g so you have "sang real," royal blood, meaning Jesus' crypto-descendants. Genius.
Alas, as I've said before, Corbyn's an anchor. Labour tribalists and the Cult won't desert the Party/him, and those rightly afraid of the bearded tit getting his hands on power can't afford to desert the Conservatives.
But how much of the electorate is represented by the Labour tribalists and the Cult? It certainly isn't 40%.
There are many people who dislike austerity, without being members of the Cult.
What austerity? Public spending keeps going up year on year, and we’re still £40bn a year short of balancing the books nearly a decade after the last recession.
I was present at the demonstration in Parliament Square two weeks ago called by Jewish groups to express their anxieties as to the perceived anti-Jewish feeling in elements of her Majesties loyal Opposition (and by definition potentially the next government). I m not a natural protester; I am a semi-retired 67 year old professional. The demonstration, called at less than 24 hours notice, brought some 2000 very atypical political protesters...predominantly mild aged, wearing suits and ties, and overwhelmingly feeling a level of anxiety at our position as loyal British Jews, of a type which none of has ever experienced in our lifetime. I can honestly say that in quite a high profile professional career, I have never experienced antisemitism. I have personal friends who are of all faiths and none, and of a whole variety of racial backgrounds. But what is perceived to be going on under Mr Corbyn's watch is quite frightening to us. British Jews have always been a tiny minority of the population, but have always tried to punch above their weight in British Society, in the professions, the arts, science, academia, philanthropy and their dearest collective wish is to be allowed to continue to contribute in our usual low-key, unobtrusive way.
We were most grateful for the labour MPs who came to lend their support, and also, and totally unreported in the press, at least two senior (non-Jewish) Conservative MPs.
IMO The LD poll number is stuck below 10% whilst it is the party of Remain/Rejoin.
And they have no hope in the Westcountry, traditionally source of many seats, whilst opposing the result of the referendum.
Edit to add: I've spoken to thousands of LD voters over the years down here; not one ever mentioned the leader, nor national policy. Local policies drove LD support down here. And many of the activists as well as voters were firmly localist, not somewhat that tallies well with Europhilia.
I totally disagree on your first point. Our poll rating is stuck well below the level of support that Remain/Rejoin commands so that certainly isn't an unpopular position (unpopular compared to Brexit, sure, but more popular than we as a party are). Our problem is that most of the remain/rejoin voters are in the Labour column at the moment. Having said that though I'm not very interested in fighting the referendum battle again. I accept that we are leaving and think we need to be finding some imaginative policies to try to keep the inevitable pain and suffering that Brexit will entail down to a minimum.
On your last point, I agree, we are fighting quite a local campaign here in my area for these elections based around our excellent candidates and the poor record of the Labour council. On the leadership... well I wouldn't have voted for Vince Cable but we are where we are and it's not his fault that nobody else wanted the job so I'm happy to get behind him.
Thank you. I for one hope that the Jewish community in Britain will continue to flourish, prosper and contribute and not be scared by those with malevolent views towards it.
It is difficult to reconcile the bolded sentence with a commitment to free speech.
The world is a jungle, not a garden. The best protection a group can be given is the protection of the law on property and person, the ability to defend itself, and the willingness to strike back. Wanting not to be scared is the stance of a child. Accepting that the world is hostile and acquring the ability to defend oneself is the stance of the adult.
The State of Israel was forced into this realisation years ago and protects itself without the chains of wanting to be liked. If one genuinely wishes to preserve the Jewish community in Britain, one must construct ways of defending against antisemitism, not pretend it doesn't exist.
It's certainly true that over half of the active members (though not the overall membership) of my local Lib Dem branch (myself included) are people who have joined up since the EU referendum. As 2015 was the year that changed the make up of Labour then 2016 was the year that changed the make up of the Lib Dems.
The big difference, of course, is that Labour has become a scarily unquestioning personality cult whereas the change in the Lib Dem membership has been rather more events driven. We newer members haven't fundamentally altered the character of the party as the issues we care about the most are the same ones that the pre-2016 members care about.
I think it would also be fair to say that we newer Lib Dems are still finding our feet - but finding them we certainly are.
I think you'll find the character of the LibDems in many places has changed a lot. Certainly in East Devon where I am it has switched from people who love meetings and were fanatical about pavement politics to people who love meetings and are fanatical remainers.
This will have the twin benefit of enabling the LibDems to do extremely badly in both local and general elections.
Alas, as I've said before, Corbyn's an anchor. Labour tribalists and the Cult won't desert the Party/him, and those rightly afraid of the bearded tit getting his hands on power can't afford to desert the Conservatives.
But how much of the electorate is represented by the Labour tribalists and the Cult? It certainly isn't 40%.
There are many people who dislike austerity, without being members of the Cult.
What austerity? Public spending keeps going up year on year, and we’re still £40bn a year short of balancing the books nearly a decade after the last recession.
Demand for public services also goes up year on year. Austerity was necessary (no country can run a budget deficit of 10% of GDP indefinitely) but there's no doubt it has been painful for many.
Alas, as I've said before, Corbyn's an anchor. Labour tribalists and the Cult won't desert the Party/him, and those rightly afraid of the bearded tit getting his hands on power can't afford to desert the Conservatives.
But how much of the electorate is represented by the Labour tribalists and the Cult? It certainly isn't 40%.
There are many people who dislike austerity, without being members of the Cult.
What austerity? Public spending keeps going up year on year, and we’re still £40bn a year short of balancing the books nearly a decade after the last recession.
Its been austerity for the young and profligacy for the old.
Alas, as I've said before, Corbyn's an anchor. Labour tribalists and the Cult won't desert the Party/him, and those rightly afraid of the bearded tit getting his hands on power can't afford to desert the Conservatives.
But how much of the electorate is represented by the Labour tribalists and the Cult? It certainly isn't 40%.
There are many people who dislike austerity, without being members of the Cult.
What austerity? Public spending keeps going up year on year, and we’re still £40bn a year short of balancing the books nearly a decade after the last recession.
A significant number of voters no longer care. They are sick of seeing cuts in local schools, police etc etc.
Alas, as I've said before, Corbyn's an anchor. Labour tribalists and the Cult won't desert the Party/him, and those rightly afraid of the bearded tit getting his hands on power can't afford to desert the Conservatives.
But how much of the electorate is represented by the Labour tribalists and the Cult? It certainly isn't 40%.
There are many people who dislike austerity, without being members of the Cult.
What austerity? Public spending keeps going up year on year, and we’re still £40bn a year short of balancing the books nearly a decade after the last recession.
A significant number of voters no longer care. They are sick of seeing cuts in local schools, police etc etc.
The council tax soars and the potholes are worse than ever
Alas, as I've said before, Corbyn's an anchor. Labour tribalists and the Cult won't desert the Party/him, and those rightly afraid of the bearded tit getting his hands on power can't afford to desert the Conservatives.
But how much of the electorate is represented by the Labour tribalists and the Cult? It certainly isn't 40%.
There are many people who dislike austerity, without being members of the Cult.
What austerity? Public spending keeps going up year on year, and we’re still £40bn a year short of balancing the books nearly a decade after the last recession.
A significant number of voters no longer care. They are sick of seeing cuts in local schools, police etc etc.
The council tax soars and the potholes are worse than ever
I'm late to this thread and haven't read the comments yet, but might the Greens tack to the centre? Obviously keep the environmental policies, but become less radical on economic matters. I'm not saying going full-on Govian, but a Green market-based approach to sustainable development might be what is needed in the political centre.
Alas, as I've said before, Corbyn's an anchor. Labour tribalists and the Cult won't desert the Party/him, and those rightly afraid of the bearded tit getting his hands on power can't afford to desert the Conservatives.
But how much of the electorate is represented by the Labour tribalists and the Cult? It certainly isn't 40%.
There are many people who dislike austerity, without being members of the Cult.
What austerity? Public spending keeps going up year on year, and we’re still £40bn a year short of balancing the books nearly a decade after the last recession.
Where is it going apart from London , is there any part of the infrastructure outside London that is not crumbling
I was present at the demonstration in Parliament Square two weeks ago called by Jewish groups to express their anxieties as to the perceived anti-Jewish feeling in elements of her Majesties loyal Opposition (and by definition potentially the next government). I m not a natural protester; I am a semi-retired 67 year old professional. The demonstration, called at less than 24 hours notice, brought some 2000 very atypical political protesters...predominantly mild aged, wearing suits and ties, and overwhelmingly feeling a level of anxiety at our position as loyal British Jews, of a type which none of has ever experienced in our lifetime. I can honestly say that in quite a high profile professional career, I have never experienced antisemitism. I have personal friends who are of all faiths and none, and of a whole variety of racial backgrounds. But what is perceived to be going on under Mr Corbyn's watch is quite frightening to us. British Jews have always been a tiny minority of the population, but have always tried to punch above their weight in British Society, in the professions, the arts, science, academia, philanthropy and their dearest collective wish is to be allowed to continue to contribute in our usual low-key, unobtrusive way.
I'm late to this thread and haven't read the comments yet, but might the Greens tack to the centre? Obviously keep the environmental policies, but become less radical on economic matters. I'm not saying going full-on Govian, but a Green market-based approach to sustainable development might be what is needed in the political centre.
In theory, the hard left greens (who were characterised as water melons) have probably now left the party to join the Corbyn show.
Alas, as I've said before, Corbyn's an anchor. Labour tribalists and the Cult won't desert the Party/him, and those rightly afraid of the bearded tit getting his hands on power can't afford to desert the Conservatives.
But how much of the electorate is represented by the Labour tribalists and the Cult? It certainly isn't 40%.
There are many people who dislike austerity, without being members of the Cult.
True, but they disliked austerity just as much in early 2017 when Labour was polling 25-28% - and austerity's being eased off on now anyway.
“QUEEN ELIZABETH must claim her right to rule Muslims.” So ran a recent headline on the Arab Atheist Network, a web forum. It was only partly in jest. According to reports from Casablanca to Karachi, the British monarch is descended from the Prophet Muhammad, making her a cousin of the kings of Morocco and Jordan, not to mention of Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Iran’s Supreme Leader.
The claim, first made many years ago, is gathering renewed interest in the Middle East. Why is not clear, but in March a Moroccan newspaper called Al-Ousboue traced the queen’s lineage back 43 generations.
I thought it was well known that John of Gaunt was descended from Mohammed (via, i think, the Emir of Barcelona but it might have been via the Caliph of Al-Andulas). I assume the Queen is descended from Gaunt.
Alas, as I've said before, Corbyn's an anchor. Labour tribalists and the Cult won't desert the Party/him, and those rightly afraid of the bearded tit getting his hands on power can't afford to desert the Conservatives.
But how much of the electorate is represented by the Labour tribalists and the Cult? It certainly isn't 40%.
There are many people who dislike austerity, without being members of the Cult.
What austerity? Public spending keeps going up year on year, and we’re still £40bn a year short of balancing the books nearly a decade after the last recession.
A significant number of voters no longer care. They are sick of seeing cuts in local schools, police etc etc.
Yet they don’t seem to be in the mood for tax rises - at least not tax rises that affect themselves.
We had a decade of extreme profligacy before the last recession, which is going to have to be paid for somehow.
“QUEEN ELIZABETH must claim her right to rule Muslims.” So ran a recent headline on the Arab Atheist Network, a web forum. It was only partly in jest. According to reports from Casablanca to Karachi, the British monarch is descended from the Prophet Muhammad, making her a cousin of the kings of Morocco and Jordan, not to mention of Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Iran’s Supreme Leader.
The claim, first made many years ago, is gathering renewed interest in the Middle East. Why is not clear, but in March a Moroccan newspaper called Al-Ousboue traced the queen’s lineage back 43 generations.
The Queen - as anyone else - has more than 10 trillion 41-greats grandparents. Even allowing for royal intermarriage, it would be surprising if none of them was Mohammed.
Mohammed is a common ancestor of virtually all European royalty and nobility.
Yes, that doesn't surprise me. The polygamy within Islam, the variable borders between the Christian and Islamic worlds, and the tendencies for ruling classes to marry within themselves - never mind the sheer scale of the ancestry routes going back nearly one and a half millenia - would make any other outcome highly surprising.
It’s actually quite direct (if my memory is still working properly). From his favourite daughter IIRC.
The Tories' poll rating is pretty reasonable given how long they've been in power. The biggest obvious risks to them winning next time would be either a UKIP or a Lib Dem revival. Neither looks remotely likely.
But I wonder if things are actually going wrong under the bonnet.
This thread suggests they are struggling to actually field a full slate of candidates for the locals.
The Tories' poll rating is pretty reasonable given how long they've been in power. The biggest obvious risks to them winning next time would be either a UKIP or a Lib Dem revival. Neither looks remotely likely.
But I wonder if things are actually going wrong under the bonnet.
This thread suggests they are struggling to actually field a full slate of candidates for the locals.
Isn't every councillor in both Manchester and Barking Labour ?
Key electoral battlegrounds they aren't.
No the Tories aren't going to do much in Barking and Dagenham but they did hold several wards there in 2010. For a working class seat which voted 70 per cent Brexit and borders Tory Havering there should at least be candidates standing.
The council might well have been controlled by the BNP in 2006 - they topped the poll in almost every ward but only stood one candidate in each case and Labour won the other two seats by default as there was a paucity of other candidates.
It is not good to have no opposition and no opposition councillors - the Tories, LDs and UKIP should at least be making an effort to run paper candidates. Otherwise if there is no choice there is no real local democracy.
You have to stand for something, not just against something. No one in the centre is clear what they are standing for.
take away Brexit and the Tories are also struggling. Indeed who anywhere has the answer as to what alternative(s) there might be to our disfunctional semi-oligarchic capitalism (other than unattractive tyranny)?
I agree. All the Brexit headbangers who will enthusiastically agree with my first post will recoil in horror at the idea that Brexit has demolished traditional Conservatism. But it has.
Absolutely. The Tory party has always existed to oppose radical change. And protect economic stability. They are astray from failing to recognise that Brexit will be a radical change, and will risk the economy - because of their strong desire to reverse a decision taken in history, and take a different path. But history doesn't work like that, and cutting across country to try and find that alternative path is far from easy.
You mistake the purpose of the Conservative party. They do not exist to oppose radical change. They exist to act as a brake on the ambitions of politicians (not quite the same thing.
Given the path the EU is (and needs to) take leaving is a profoundly conservative thing to do.
The Conservative Party embraces more radical policy when it becomes electorally necessary to do so, or when it must pursue it to preserve one of its fundamental principles.
The Conservative Party was radical over electoral reform in the 1860s, imperial reform in the 1930s, over monetarism in the 1980s, and now over Brexit.
The idea that traditional Conservatism is dead is a nonsense.
As one of the more centralising PMs of modern times, Thatcher wasn't much of a Conservative by Charles' definition.
Whereas Gove stabbing Johnson in the front....
Look up my thread on the subject! Thatcher was a Radical.
You mistake the purpose of the Conservative party. They do not exist to oppose radical change. They exist to act as a brake on the ambitions of politicians (not quite the same thing.
Given the path the EU is (and needs to) take leaving is a profoundly conservative thing to do.
The Conservative Party embraces more radical policy when it becomes electorally necessary to do so, or when it must pursue it to preserve one of its fundamental principles.
The Conservative Party was radical over electoral reform in the 1860s, imperial reform in the 1930s, over monetarism in the 1980s, and now over Brexit.
The idea that traditional Conservatism is dead is a nonsense.
Indeed. But one must remember what "traditional Conservatism" is.
The Conservative party exists to preserve the patrimony and power of the wealthy and the landowners. When it extended its cloak downwards to the middle-classes and mortgageholders in the 20's it survived, and when it extended further to the upper working-classes and council-house sales in the 80's it triumphed. As is true of all parties, "principles" are bolted on retrospectively to justify actions taken to defend one's constituencies. As long as Conservatives are in power, then "traditional Conservatism" has survived.
I'm late to this thread and haven't read the comments yet, but might the Greens tack to the centre? Obviously keep the environmental policies, but become less radical on economic matters. I'm not saying going full-on Govian, but a Green market-based approach to sustainable development might be what is needed in the political centre.
There's should be potential in advocating living within your means, restricting immigration and consequently the need for development, taxes on air travel, restrictions on imported factory farming products, organic farming, distrust of multinational business, support for localism etc.
The big problem is that the two political reasons for either a new party or a Lib Dem revival inspired by a desire for a new moderate force a - Brexit and the malevolent idiocy of Corbyn are also, in the short term, pushing people to stay in Labour, or at least not desert it in sufficient numbers to mark a shift. Brexit is an issue in the here and now. A new party/revived LDs would be too far from power to have a real impact in either softening or blocking Brexit in time. It took the LDs 20 years from the SDP merger to build up the sufficient political capital and seats to enter government, optimistically it could take two elections - one to obtain a national profile and build support, and another to turn that into a seat winning strategy, before the party could realistically claim to be a real player and argue that it, rather than Labour, deserved the votes of social liberals. So, if you think Brexit is a national calamity, it makes sense until March 2019 to stay put. Similarly, those within Labour who are utterly ashamed of the festering sewer Corbyn and his backers are turning it into, feel they have a duty not to voluntarily hand the keys to the asylum over to the lunatics.
Of course, neither of these situations can hold. Brexit will happen and will be judged - and Labour will have been complicit in it (and won't be ale to take credit if it is a success). A new liberal force will be necessary to either rejoin or enter into the EEA or EFTA. By that time Corbyn will also have completed his transformation of Labour so those who don't bend the knee to the fanatics aren't welcome, or failed. Labour will either have come to its senses or beyond repair.
So I think a new party is a real possibility - just not on the timescale put forward by most.
I'm late to this thread and haven't read the comments yet, but might the Greens tack to the centre? Obviously keep the environmental policies, but become less radical on economic matters. I'm not saying going full-on Govian, but a Green market-based approach to sustainable development might be what is needed in the political centre.
There's should be potential in advocating living within your means, restricting immigration and consequently the need for development, taxes on air travel, restrictions on imported factory farming products, organic farming, distrust of multinational business, support for localism etc.
...There's should be potential in advocating living within your means...
The *minute* you spot a party that advocates a government spending less than it takes, you tell me about it. Because none of the major parties want to do that.
The Tories' poll rating is pretty reasonable given how long they've been in power. The biggest obvious risks to them winning next time would be either a UKIP or a Lib Dem revival. Neither looks remotely likely.
But I wonder if things are actually going wrong under the bonnet.
This thread suggests they are struggling to actually field a full slate of candidates for the locals.
The Tories' poll rating is pretty reasonable given how long they've been in power. The biggest obvious risks to them winning next time would be either a UKIP or a Lib Dem revival. Neither looks remotely likely.
But I wonder if things are actually going wrong under the bonnet.
This thread suggests they are struggling to actually field a full slate of candidates for the locals.
Isn't every councillor in both Manchester and Barking Labour ?
Key electoral battlegrounds they aren't.
No the Tories aren't going to do much in Barking and Dagenham but they did hold several wards there in 2010. For a working class seat which voted 70 per cent Brexit and borders Tory Havering there should at least be candidates standing.
The council might well have been controlled by the BNP in 2006 - they topped the poll in almost every ward but only stood one candidate in each case and Labour won the other two seats by default as there was a paucity of other candidates.
It is not good to have no opposition and no opposition councillors - the Tories, LDs and UKIP should at least be making an effort to run paper candidates. Otherwise if there is no choice there is no real local democracy.
Every councillor elected in Barking in 2010 was Labour:
You mistake the purpose of the Conservative party. They do not exist to oppose radical change. They exist to act as a brake on the ambitions of politicians (not quite the same thing.
Given the path the EU is (and needs to) take leaving is a profoundly conservative thing to do.
The Conservative Party embraces more radical policy when it becomes electorally necessary to do so, or when it must pursue it to preserve one of its fundamental principles.
The Conservative Party was radical over electoral reform in the 1860s, imperial reform in the 1930s, over monetarism in the 1980s, and now over Brexit.
The idea that traditional Conservatism is dead is a nonsense.
Indeed. But one must remember what "traditional Conservatism" is.
The Conservative party exists to preserve the patrimony and power of the wealthy and the landowners. When it extended its cloak downwards to the middle-classes and mortgageholders in the 20's it survived, and when it extended further to the upper working-classes and council-house sales in the 80's it triumphed. As is true of all parties, "principles" are bolted on retrospectively to justify actions taken to defend one's constituencies. As long as Conservatives are in power, then "traditional Conservatism" has survived.
What a cynic you are. I can't actually fault your logic or facts. But you are still cynical.
There's should be potential in ...restricting immigration and consequently the need for development, taxes on air travel, restrictions on imported factory farming products, organic farming, distrust of multinational business, support for localism etc.
Um hold on. Isn't that the (economic) prospectus of the Nazi party?
Comments
The European leader of the Jews has said today that if Corbyn became Prime Minister Jews would flee the UK.
Can we really imagine that in todays multicultural society a leader of a community would express views not heard of since WW2
G, that sounds like claptrap to me, he sounds much worse than the anti-semites to me. Hopefully he is at the head of any queue leaving. Sounds a bit like those thick pop stars that claim they will leave if taxes go up but never do.
Morning Malc - I do not think we should have that attitude to any part of our society. Whether you are a Christian, Jew, Muslim, all faiths and none, you should be welcome in our Country and no one should be driven out by fear or hatred
So far, their answer has been to either blame the voters or blame manipulation of the voters. The voters notice this, tune out anything else they say as patronising or condescending, and then look for leadership elsewhere that respects them, and their views and wishes. In May and Corbyn, in two very different ways, they see leaders that do, or at least try to do.
Until politicians like Blair, Clegg, and Osborne - or the generation who succeed them - can adjust to the new reality and make a inspired and positive case for their form of politics that's relevant to, and respects, the voters they are condemned to remain in the wilderness.
Rejoice, let us rejoice at this news
https://twitter.com/spreadsheetben/status/982525519311855616
The Conservative Party was radical over electoral reform in the 1860s, imperial reform in the 1930s, over monetarism in the 1980s, and now over Brexit.
The idea that traditional Conservatism is dead is a nonsense.
They are a party at war with itself and there is no sign of this being resolved anytime soon. In the event that we start seeing deselection that must be the time for the PLP to rebel and resign the whip and form their own party on the benches. If it was organised properly up to 100 MP's could be part of a new movement and with 4 years to the next election they could establish themselves as a centre left party acceptable to many
G, that sounds like claptrap to me, he sounds much worse than the anti-semites to me. Hopefully he is at the head of any queue leaving. Sounds a bit like those thick pop stars that claim they will leave if taxes go up but never do.
Morning Malc - I do not think we should have that attitude to any part of our society. Whether you are a Christian, Jew, Muslim, all faiths and none, you should be welcome in our Country and no one should be driven out by fear or hatred
For sure G , but I think it is mince, there may well be some hatred in the south east but I have never seen or heard anything in my life and people like this joining the band wagon and trying to fan the flames is not helpful.
So is it really much of a dilemma? A whole bunch of MPs don’t like Corbyn, and a noisy minority of members don’t either. The moderates post ge seem to have accepted the state of play, though recent events have led to some more grumbling, and that’s the resolution to their dilemma - grumble when you can, then pull together at election time. Problems in the ranks once in power is a problem for another day.
Zeus, I'm not so sure about.
There's a case to be made for liberalism, but the case does actually need to be made by explaining why these principles are valuable.
Why did my coat just land on me?
Of course, HM is also a descendent of Jesus and, therefore, God Almighty.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt5270948/
"From day one post-Brexit, the question for Mrs May, even if it is not articulated out loud, will be: “Are you still here?” The gun goes on the succession at once."
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/comment/theres-a-dignified-way-for-may-to-leave-no-10-pmrvhj788?CMP=Sprkr-_-Editorial-_-thetimes-_-Unspecified-_-TWITTER
Key electoral battlegrounds they aren't.
I believe it is based on fact.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-43653291
Both have had continuous Labour majority control since they came into existence.
Whereas Gove stabbing Johnson in the front....
It is, just to be clear, bollocks, but it rests on one of the best bits of textual criticism ever. You have lots of tedious stories about the quest for the holy grail, but wtf is a grail? You don't hear people offering grails of tea to one another. So you take "san greal", holy grail, and just move the g so you have "sang real," royal blood, meaning Jesus' crypto-descendants. Genius.
On your last point, I agree, we are fighting quite a local campaign here in my area for these elections based around our excellent candidates and the poor record of the Labour council. On the leadership... well I wouldn't have voted for Vince Cable but we are where we are and it's not his fault that nobody else wanted the job so I'm happy to get behind him.
The world is a jungle, not a garden. The best protection a group can be given is the protection of the law on property and person, the ability to defend itself, and the willingness to strike back. Wanting not to be scared is the stance of a child. Accepting that the world is hostile and acquring the ability to defend oneself is the stance of the adult.
The State of Israel was forced into this realisation years ago and protects itself without the chains of wanting to be liked. If one genuinely wishes to preserve the Jewish community in Britain, one must construct ways of defending against antisemitism, not pretend it doesn't exist.
This will have the twin benefit of enabling the LibDems to do extremely badly in both local and general elections.
Jesus Christ knocked up Mary Magdalene, and the Catholic Church/Opus Dei is trying to keep it secret/murder the bloodline.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesus_bloodline#The_Da_Vinci_Code
[edit: fix html]
We had a decade of extreme profligacy before the last recession, which is going to have to be paid for somehow.
The council might well have been controlled by the BNP in 2006 - they topped the poll in almost every ward but only stood one candidate in each case and Labour won the other two seats by default as there was a paucity of other candidates.
It is not good to have no opposition and no opposition councillors - the Tories, LDs and UKIP should at least be making an effort to run paper candidates. Otherwise if there is no choice there is no real local democracy.
The Conservative party exists to preserve the patrimony and power of the wealthy and the landowners. When it extended its cloak downwards to the middle-classes and mortgageholders in the 20's it survived, and when it extended further to the upper working-classes and council-house sales in the 80's it triumphed. As is true of all parties, "principles" are bolted on retrospectively to justify actions taken to defend one's constituencies. As long as Conservatives are in power, then "traditional Conservatism" has survived.
Of course, neither of these situations can hold. Brexit will happen and will be judged - and Labour will have been complicit in it (and won't be ale to take credit if it is a success). A new liberal force will be necessary to either rejoin or enter into the EEA or EFTA. By that time Corbyn will also have completed his transformation of Labour so those who don't bend the knee to the fanatics aren't welcome, or failed. Labour will either have come to its senses or beyond repair.
So I think a new party is a real possibility - just not on the timescale put forward by most.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barking_and_Dagenham_London_Borough_Council_election,_2010
And in 2006 the BNP only stood in 7 of the 17 wards:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barking_and_Dagenham_London_Borough_Council_election,_2006
Its also a borough where demographic change is happening rapidly.
Though I expect that there will be candidates of other parties in each ward.