Current Affairs The Labour Party

[abelard]

Your absolute lack of self awareness is hysterical.

This just demonstrates my point.

You imply that Sanders is naive, and romantic, and not a serious politician, because that is what the media you consume suggests you should think.

And yet you live in a country which enjoys the sort of healthcare system he and others want to implement in the United States, and I doubt in a million years you would ever trade it for American-style private insurance.

 

[zzr45]

This just demonstrates my point.

You imply that Sanders is naive, and romantic, and not a serious politician, because that is what the media you consume suggests you should think.

And yet you live in a country which enjoys the sort of healthcare system he and others want to implement in the United States, and I doubt in a million years you would ever trade it for American-style private insurance.

No I wouldn’t. But I also understand that the social and cultural constructs of the US prevent it from happening, because to them it’s unthinkable. It’s like a politician standing up in this country and proposing that we deregulate firearms. It wouldn’t fly.

He has wonderful ideas, but actually implementing them in the US seems a bridge too far.

 

[abelard]

No I wouldn’t. But I also understand that the social and cultural constructs of the US prevent it from happening, because to them it’s unthinkable. It’s like a politician standing up in this country and proposing that we deregulate firearms. It wouldn’t fly.

He has wonderful ideas, but actually implementing them in the US seems a bridge too far.

I'm not sure you understand the United States as well as you might think you do. Things can change (obviously). Ending racial segregation was once just as unthinkable there. So was electing Donald Trump.

Even if Sanders doesn't win, he has already shifted the Democratic Party decisively in the direction of expanded health care coverage.

And this has happened precisely because his policies are so popular, even among Republicans. He certainly isn't winning over voters with favourable press coverage, or his good looks and charisma...

This is why people who would lose money should ideas take hold have been scrambling to give him the Corbyn treatment (he's a Nicaraguan sleeper agent, he's a serial mansplainer, he said something vaguely nice in 1964 about someone who was later Bad etc.)

But in an age of decentralised media consumption, for better or worse, it is much more difficult to curate people's reality for them using nonsense signalling terms like 'centrist'.

 

[davids]

"
The revelations also provoked anger among many Conservative politicians. One former minister in David Cameron’s government said the embassy’s efforts to exert improper influence on British public life went far further than any plot to “take down” unhelpful members of parliament.
Writing anonymously in the Mail on Sunday, the former minister said: “British foreign policy is in hock to Israeli influence at the heart of our politics, and those in authority have ignored what is going on.
“For years the Conservative Friends of Israel (CFI) and Labour Friends of Israel (LFI) have worked with – even for – the Israeli embassy to promote Israeli policy and thwart UK government policy and the actions of ministers who try to defend Palestinian rights.
“Lots of countries try to force their views on others, but what is scandalous in the UK is that instead of resisting it, successive governments have submitted to it, take donors’ money, and allowed Israeli influence-peddling to shape policy and even determine the fate of ministers.”
The former minister said there needed to be a full inquiry into the Israeli embassy’s links with CFI and LFI, and that while political parties should welcome funding from the UK’s Jewish community, they should not accept any engagement linked to Israel until it ceases new developments on Palestinian land"

Labour calls for inquiry into Israeli diplomat's 'take down MPs' plot

Emily Thornberry describes remarks by embassy official Shai Masot, caught on camera, as a national security issue

www.theguardian.com

Funny feeling this will get lost in the Brexit turmoil.

 

[Bruce Wayne]

I'm not sure you understand the United States as well as you might think you do. Things can change (obviously). Ending racial segregation was once just as unthinkable there. So was electing Donald Trump.

Even if Sanders doesn't win, he has already shifted the Democratic Party decisively in the direction of expanded health care coverage.

And this has happened precisely because his policies are so popular, even among Republicans. He certainly isn't winning over voters with favourable press coverage, or his good looks and charisma...

This is why people who would lose money should ideas take hold have been scrambling to give him the Corbyn treatment (he's a Nicaraguan sleeper agent, he's a serial mansplainer, he said something vaguely nice in 1964 about someone who was later Bad etc.)

But in an age of decentralised media consumption, for better or worse, it is much more difficult to curate people's reality for them using nonsense signalling terms like 'centrist'.

So in an age where people have chosen things like Trump and Brexit, we're supposed to trust in their wisdom that Sanders or Corbyn's policies are good simply because they're popular? I'm almost inclined to think that whatever 'the people' think is popular is almost guaranteed to be a crapshoot. I mean healthcare is a good example in that the American system is universally used to deride private healthcare, yet Japanese hospitals are a mixture of public and private, but with the state footing the bill. You wouldn't have people pooing their pants at the EU/Japan trade deal that Japanese health providers are coming here to gobble up our beloved NHS. Maybe we're all susceptible to swallowing narratives, huh?

 

[dwightschrute]

I'm not sure you understand the United States as well as you might think you do. Things can change (obviously). Ending racial segregation was once just as unthinkable there. So was electing Donald Trump.

Even if Sanders doesn't win, he has already shifted the Democratic Party decisively in the direction of expanded health care coverage.

And this has happened precisely because his policies are so popular, even among Republicans. He certainly isn't winning over voters with favourable press coverage, or his good looks and charisma...

This is why people who would lose money should ideas take hold have been scrambling to give him the Corbyn treatment (he's a Nicaraguan sleeper agent, he's a serial mansplainer, he said something vaguely nice in 1964 about someone who was later Bad etc.)

But in an age of decentralised media consumption, for better or worse, it is much more difficult to curate people's reality for them using nonsense signalling terms like 'centrist'.

Capitalist Realism as the late great Mark Fisher would call it

 

[dholliday]

Your absolute lack of self awareness is hysterical.

nailed it lol

 

[abelard]

So in an age where people have chosen things like Trump and Brexit, we're supposed to trust in their wisdom that Sanders or Corbyn's policies are good simply because they're popular? I'm almost inclined to think that whatever 'the people' think is popular is almost guaranteed to be a crapshoot. I mean healthcare is a good example in that the American system is universally used to deride private healthcare, yet Japanese hospitals are a mixture of public and private, but with the state footing the bill. You wouldn't have people pooing their pants at the EU/Japan trade deal that Japanese health providers are coming here to gobble up our beloved NHS. Maybe we're all susceptible to swallowing narratives, huh?

You are misinterpreting what I wrote.

I wrote that the term 'centrist' would be more appropriately used to describe Sanders' policies, because there is a mass bipartisan consensus in support of them.

I have never suggested that they are 'good simply because they are popular'.

 

[Bruce Wayne]

You are misinterpreting what I wrote.

I wrote that the term 'centrist' would be more appropriately used to describe Sanders' policies, because there is a mass consensus in support of them.

I have never suggested that they are 'good simply because they are popular'.

It is if that mass consensus is formed by the public though.

 

[abelard]

It is if that mass consensus is formed by the public though.

??

 

[Bruce Wayne]

??

You said there was a mass consensus supporting them. Who is that consensus formed among?

 

[abelard]

You said there was a mass consensus supporting them. Who is that consensus formed among?

mass = lots of people, from both parties in this case.

what's your point?

 

[Bruce Wayne]

mass = lots of people, from both parties in this case.

what's your point?

I give different people different levels of credibility when judging whether a policy is sound or not, and the general public are pretty low down the list. That's the very nature of populism - things that sound great to people largely ill-equipped to determine whether they're sensible or feasible.

 

[abelard]

I give different people different levels of credibility when judging whether a policy is sound or not, and the general public are pretty low down the list. That's the very nature of populism - things that sound great to people largely ill-equipped to determine whether they're sensible or feasible.

Fine, but none of that has anything to do with what I initially said

 

[Bruce Wayne]

Fine, but none of that has anything to do with what I initially said

Fairy snuff. Must have misunderstood.