Jeremy Corbyn to be elected Labour Leader?
- This topic has 621 replies, 26 voices, and was last updated 6 years, 5 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
jondwhite wrote:The big question is why a "workers hero" is pandering to the CBI.
Because Labour's plans to reform capitalism involve leaving "the commanding heights of the economy" in private capitalist hands; which means that a Labour government under Corbyn will depend on the capitalist firms' willingness to go on investing which they will only do if the government does nothing to endanger their profits and their profit-making. It's so obvious that this is going to happen but there are many, including some ex-socialists who ought to know better, who don't realise this and don't want to.
ALB wrote:It's so obvious that this is going to happen but there are many, including some ex-socialists who ought to know better, who don't realise this and don't want to.It makes our task a lot more difficult when ex-socialists "who ought to know better" vote Labour revealing that they have leaned nothing from history. How can we convince non socialist workers to learn when socialists can,t
It's not as if Labour politicians don't know about this. Here's Harold Lever (later a Cabinet Minister and a Lord) over 50 years ago, though it's possible that they too have forgotten or don't know their history:
Quote:Labour's economic plans are not in any way geared to nationalisation; they are directed towards increased production on the basis of the continued existence of a large private sector. Within the terms of a profit system it is not possible, in the long run, to achieve sustained increases in output without an adequate flow of profit to promote and finance them. The Labour leadership knows as well as any businessman that an engine which runs on profit cannot be made to move faster without extra fuel. So, though profits may be squeezed temporarily by taxation and Government price policy, they must and will, over a longer period, increase significantly even if not proportionately to increased production (Observer, 3 April 1966).i I think it is important to look at and talk to the ‘deplorables’ who are part of this Corbynite phenomenon. A large proportion of them are poorly paid public sector health worker, students in debt, recipients of universal credit and all that kind of stuff. They are being disproportionately ‘economically’ screwed by the system. The benefits system was never very nice but as it was in the early 1980’s when I was on the dole for 3 years was luxury compared to what it is now. You have the bedroom tax which is very nasty, changes in the ‘welfare’ payment system for rents and all humiliating hoops you have do jump through to ‘demonstrate that you are actively looking for work under constant threat of sanctions. Forcing people to take temporary work of a few weeks and then having to go through the application procedure again with the inevitable delayed payments. And the stuff that flows from it like foodbanks and payday loaners etc. The film ‘I Daniel Blake’ covered what is the norm and familiar for a lot of people and not at all sensationalist hyperbole. And the stress associated with it. Clever bods like ourselves will know how to play it better but the ‘deplorables’ are really hacked off with it all. The ‘deplorables’ and ‘trailer trash’ don’t expect or believe that Corbynism can deliver a land of milk and honey. Even if they are politically ‘intellectually challenged’ by our high standards a lot of them have a refreshingly accurate understanding of capitalism and how it works, compared to the 1980’s; when you rarely even heard the word mentioned. For them they want to improve their economic position within capitalism. The standard avenue for that ‘for us’ ? Is trade unionism. For them they believe that is not available. So they are seeking an improvement in their economic position politically; out of desperation. For many of them the political state is their employer and for the others as with changes to the ‘welfare’ Department of Stealth and Social Insecurity system, the font of their misery. And also for many the political state are their employers. There is also a Michael Moore “F**k You” aspect to it which is an anglo saxon expression of class consciousness. The more the 1% hate it the more 99% like it. We need to address this kind of stuff and countering it with it isn’t socialism and capitalism is crap and there are limitations on how far you can take etc. Won’t work because they know that; it isn’t what they are saying or thinking.
You can see why people on benefits wouldn't want to vote for the Tories, but is there evidence that they vote Labou rather than adopting a "they're all the same" or a "plague on both your houses" attitude and not voting at all?. In any event, surveys suggest that Corbyn activists are mainly university-educated young people. Labour, as distinct from Corbyn, has the support of public sector workers and so-called "ethnic minorities".
..and this according to the L.S.E. is how he used the Facbook stuff to reach them. Obviously as we are not issues based as such, but have a single issue of getting rid of capitalism, we need to resonate in different ways, but some lessons can be derived from labour's 'success' with a younger demographic, surely.http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/politicsandpolicy/explaining-labours-facebook-success/In business they punt a USP (unique selling point), ours is a correct analysis and solution over 113 years, the oldest socialist party, the second oldest political party and the oldest socialist journal, none of which resonate as significant in themselves, for the wider electorates, who are looking for quick fixes to immediate demands.
http://www.sunderlandecho.com/news/jeremy-corbyn-visits-radical-bookshop-after-paying-respects-to-davey-hopper-1-8041829We can extend our own hospitality and invite Jeremy to No. 52 for tea and biscuits
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.