Current Affairs The Labour Party

[davek]

A war which will lead to the destruction of Labour as a viable (long term) governing party. So I can't see why you welcome it with glee.

I'm not saying things could have stayed the same as it was, they were always on a collision course but what has happened over the last few weeks was not the right way to go about it.

The centre-right, pro-"free market" Blairites have pushed and pushed for a fight. They'll get it eventually and they'll be wiped out.

 

[bring the ghost on]

This is a fairly well documented debate, both in 3rd sector and across a broader context:

Structural racism at heart of British society, UN human rights panel says

Experts cite police data showing disproportionate number of minority ethnic people died due to excessive use of force by state

www.theguardian.com

dRworksBook

Dismantling Racism Works (dRworks) is pleased to offer our workbook and other resources. We hope you find the material here useful to you, your organization, and your community.

www.dismantlingracism.org

http://scholar.google.co.uk/scholar...KC-fI7wDqVbHJezcvzUOvML5Q&nossl=1&oi=scholarr

[/URL]

Let’s talk about racism in education and international development

This blog post was written by Arathi Sriprakash, Sociologist of Education at the University of Cambridge. It is a reflection on discussions that took place at a seminar on “Questions of Race in…

www.ukfiet.org

https://www.radiaid.com (anything on that site)

For my own credentials to offer an opinion:
I worked for an International NGO for 10 years (I'm not going to go into which, but you may be able to infer from my posting history), have lectured on International Development, International Humanitarian Law, led conferences on conflict resolution in developing countries and contributed to international aid policy and strategy.

You have quoted studies showing that racism exists in society, I don’t think anyone disputes that racism is still a big problem.

However, I don’t see why we have to put a downer on people who are doing good charitable work by implying they are driven by motives of feeling racially superior.

 

[Jebus_lives]

You have quoted studies showing that racism exists in society, I don’t think anyone disputes that racism is still a big problem.

However, I don’t see why we have to put a downer on people who are doing good charitable work by implying they are driven by motives of feeling racially superior.

I haven't just added those in, I've used them to illustrate a wider symptomatic problem, but I've also included some links in there for discussion about the way aid is percieved in international development. I'd be happy to share more, but there is a huge amount of discussion on the topic and I'm starting to think it's getting a bit off topic for the thread.

I'm not putting a 'downer' on 'good charitable work' (which is an entire debate in itself), I'm suggesting that in some instances whether done consciously or not, there can be a perception, when providing aid of 'doing to' and 'knowing what's best' which can be derived from feeling inherently superior.

In any situation, particularly around charitable work, you have to face challenges around the balance of good vs harm. It's not an absolute position of harm vs good.

 

[dholliday]

Labour anti-Semitism: Tom Watson clashes with party boss

Labour's deputy leader says "opacity and delay" in party processes have led to "a complete loss of trust."

www.bbc.co.uk

This is nicely boiling up now for an all out internal war.

Good. It cant come quickly enough. The membership will back the leadership and the only option for the Neo-Blairites will be to either sling their hook or STFU forever.

Let battle commence.

The right wing media have done that already.The best we can hope for is a clear out of the Blairite faction that will at least leave us as an effective opposition.

I support booting out the Blairites, but...and it's a massive but...Labour without blairism hasn't won an election in over 40 years.

If Corbyn's Labour don't win the next one, then either the Blairites will take over Labour or Labour will suffer LibDem-esque loss of confidence among the voters, leaving the door open for this new centrist party to move up the field (as has happened in Germany with AfD, which contrary to media reports actually offer mostly centrist policies).

In short, Corbyn must win the next election otherwise we can permanently say goodbye to socialist ideals meaning anything at national level.

 

[davek]

I support booting out the Blairites, but...and it's a massive but...Labour without blairism hasn't won an election in over 40 years.

If Corbyn's Labour don't win the next one, then either the Blairites will take over Labour or Labour will suffer LibDem-esque loss of confidence among the voters, leaving the door open for this new centrist party to move up the field (as has happened in Germany with AfD, which contrary to media reports actually offer mostly centrist policies).

In short, Corbyn must win the next election otherwise we can permanently say goodbye to socialist ideals meaning anything at national level.

I disagree. It's likely there'll be another hung parliament and the LP will be kept out of power with no firm government in place. Corbyn might have to stand aside but the membership will ensure his successor will be a Corbynista and the strength of that faction within the PLP will be stronger after the next election with a swathe of left candidates being elected.

I wouldn't fetishe being in government - it's going to be an almost impossible task post-Brexit, and in any case a bigger issue for the left in the LP is to rout the interlopers from the 80s and 90s - makes sure they are buried forever and kicked out into some forlorn middle ground party that will sink like a stone (because they dont have a social base to draw strength from - as was the case with the SDP who couldn't take trade unions with them).

Forget the next election, it could end up better or worse than people think it will right now as events unfold and the Tories face their own massively likely schism. The bigger prize is returning a real choice to the British people for the first time since the early 1980s.

 

[bring the ghost on]

I haven't just added those in, I've used them to illustrate a wider symptomatic problem, but I've also included some links in there for discussion about the way aid is percieved in international development. I'd be happy to share more, but there is a huge amount of discussion on the topic and I'm starting to think it's getting a bit off topic for the thread.

I'm not putting a 'downer' on 'good charitable work' (which is an entire debate in itself), I'm suggesting that in some instances whether done consciously or not, there can be a perception, when providing aid of 'doing to' and 'knowing what's best' which can be derived from feeling inherently superior.

In any situation, particularly around charitable work, you have to face challenges around the balance of good vs harm. It's not an absolute position of harm vs good.

Fair post and I wouldn’t disagree with that per se.

I have a problem with the manner in which Lammy expressed the point, which is to suggest that there is a problem with the people providing the charitable services.

I think that is an unfair slight on those people and that the default position should be that they have good intentions, rather than malicious/racist intentions (unless proved contrary).

Whether the charitable efforts are perceived as being (rather than intended to be) shrouded in racial superiority is a slightly different issue and is difficult to answer - I suspect the answer to depends on the recipient of the charitable efforts and will vary depending on the circumstances. It’s difficult to generalise and I don’t think the answer is to criticise those providing the charitable efforts.

 

[jackyboy]

Think Lammy was spot on. That Instagram picture was abhorrent.

 

[Jebus_lives]

Fair post and I wouldn’t disagree with that per se.

I have a problem with the manner in which Lammy expressed the point, which is to suggest that there is a problem with the people providing the charitable services.

I think that is an unfair slight on those people and that the default position should be that they have good intentions, rather than malicious/racist intentions (unless proved contrary).

Whether the charitable efforts are perceived as being (rather than intended to be) shrouded in racial superiority is a slightly different issue and is difficult to answer - I suspect the answer to depends on the recipient of the charitable efforts and will vary depending on the circumstances. It’s difficult to generalise and I don’t think the answer is to criticise those providing the charitable efforts.

I agree with that. I think it's a slightly ham fisted (maybe Lam fisted should become a thing) way of approaching what is a complex issue.

I think he has a very good point, but in among that you shouldn't lose sight of the ultimate aim - which is to raise money and awareness..I also think it's unfair to generalise in the manner in which he has done. As you say, give the benefit of doubt about the intentions.

I have however, and again it's well documented, especially in instances of convergent volunteering or spontaneous offers of support, seen 'charity' do tremendous harm and actually cause problems - especially where people give little or no thought to logistics or disposal of donated physical items or are offering 'support' which is wholely inappropriate.

 

[Jebus_lives]

I disagree. It's likely there'll be another hung parliament and the LP will be kept out of power with no firm government in place. Corbyn might have to stand aside but the membership will ensure his successor will be a Corbynista and the strength of that faction within the PLP will be stronger after the next election with a swathe of left candidates being elected.

I wouldn't fetishe being in government - it's going to be an almost impossible task post-Brexit, and in any case a bigger issue for the left in the LP is to rout the interlopers from the 80s and 90s - makes sure they are buried forever and kicked out into some forlorn middle ground party that will sink like a stone (because they dont have a social base to draw strength from - as was the case with the SDP who couldn't take trade unions with them).

Forget the next election, it could end up better or worse than people think it will right now as events unfold and the Tories face their own massively likely schism. The bigger prize is returning a real choice to the British people for the first time since the early 1980s.

Who would you like to see if Corbyn goes?

 

[The binman chronicles]

I disagree. It's likely there'll be another hung parliament and the LP will be kept out of power with no firm government in place. Corbyn might have to stand aside but the membership will ensure his successor will be a Corbynista and the strength of that faction within the PLP will be stronger after the next election with a swathe of left candidates being elected.

I wouldn't fetishe being in government - it's going to be an almost impossible task post-Brexit, and in any case a bigger issue for the left in the LP is to rout the interlopers from the 80s and 90s - makes sure they are buried forever and kicked out into some forlorn middle ground party that will sink like a stone (because they dont have a social base to draw strength from - as was the case with the SDP who couldn't take trade unions with them).

Forget the next election, it could end up better or worse than people think it will right now as events unfold and the Tories face their own massively likely schism. The bigger prize is returning a real choice to the British people for the first time since the early 1980s.

While I agree with you the term after the next election could be a bit of a poison chalice I don't understand that way of thinking. People are suffering now. You can't say to the public we're not in a position to challenge right now so hold on until 2027 and hopefully we have got our crap together by then. Every election should be fought on what are the needs and wants of UK right now, particularly at this time it shouldn't be a difficult task.

 

[dholliday]

I wouldn't fetishe being in government - it's going to be an almost impossible task post-Brexit, and in any case a bigger issue for the left in the LP is to rout the interlopers from the 80s and 90s - makes sure they are buried forever and kicked out into some forlorn middle ground party that will sink like a stone (because they dont have a social base to draw strength from - as was the case with the SDP who couldn't take trade unions with them).

Forget the next election, it could end up better or worse than people think it will right now as events unfold and the Tories face their own massively likely schism. The bigger prize is returning a real choice to the British people for the first time since the early 1980s.

I would! Otherwise what's the point? I'd rather the party of my choice dealing with post-Brexit, and I'd like that to be a Corbyn-led Labour government. Otherwise, why even vote?

 

[abelard]

I would! Otherwise what's the point? I'd rather the party of my choice dealing with post-Brexit, and I'd like that to be a Corbyn-led Labour government. Otherwise, why even vote?

Exactly.

That said, it is not at all implausible to imagine both Sanders and Corbyn taking power just as the worldwide quantitative easing bubbles all pop, wereupon the architects of two global financial meltdowns in little more than decade scramble to place the blame on 'socialism'

 

[dholliday]

Exactly.

That said, it is not at all implausible to imagine both Sanders and Corbyn taking power just as the worldwide quantitative easing bubbles all pop, wereupon the architects of two global financial meltdowns in little more than decade scramble to place the blame on 'socialism'

as uneasily opposite each other we are in political threads, when it comes down to where our vote goes we probably put the cross next to the same names, if i was ammie i'd go Sanders too.

i'm in a socialist-lite country (Germany) and i like how they do things here. not perfect by a long stretch, but relatively balanced and fair.

 

[davek]

Who would you like to see if Corbyn goes?

I think there'll be a clamour for a woman to be leader. Maybe Rebecca Long-Bailey. John McDonnell would be the obvious successor, but maybe if a man again and a new face, someone like Richard Burgon who's had a lot of exposure dealing with the media.

 

[davek]

While I agree with you the term after the next election could be a bit of a poison chalice I don't understand that way of thinking. People are suffering now. You can't say to the public we're not in a position to challenge right now so hold on until 2027 and hopefully we have got our crap together by then. Every election should be fought on what are the needs and wants of UK right now, particularly at this time it shouldn't be a difficult task.

Get in power and do what exactly with a load of neo-Blairites to pacify and drag the government toward the centre ground policies the party wouldn't have won on?