The Labour Party

True, ab, and food for thought. I don't know the answer. Ideally, conflict should be resolved without killing and I do find war evil, but I also think that some wars are 'just wars' as Thomas Aquinas defined them. I think the important thing is that there's an exit strategy, which I don't believe there has been with the Middle East.

I don't agree with renewing Trident, but I also think that, as a country, we can't stick our head in the sand and we need to have some kind of robust defence strategy.

Pacifists are mocked as people who would allow the country to be taken over by whom ever wanted to. It is not, it means guns, bombs, gas are the last resort not the first

"Plenty of Libdem/Conservative voters" posting on Gransnet? How do you know, eloethan? I don't know of any; there may be some but I have yet to come across them. Are you sure you aren't making assumptions based on your own perceptions?

Oh, wait... I do know of one person who has said she used to be a Liberal Party member.

To add to what I wrote before - my impression of Corbyn is that he is honest, true to his views, in spite of the media attempts to put him down. And he's not in politics to make a future and money for himself.
But whether he has enough leadership qualities to make him PM in this materialistic age, I 'm not sure.

thatbags, you might be surprised that there are many liberals on GN but you shouldn't be. I'm a Libdem supporter and proud of it.

Several surveys of political values have shown that at least a third of voters support the values of liberalism and social democracy.

Of course, they don't all vote Libdem because they think the party cannot win under the first-past-the post voting system. If you think like that please campaign for a proper democratic change to proportional representation.

Unfortunately a party which is inclusive, has support in every region, but no support from big trade unions or big industry or a partisan media, has little hope of winning until we can create a proper democracy.

roseasarered You said:

"As you [Anya] say, there must be moderate Labour voters on Gransnet, so let's hear from them! It may now sadly be the case that the few ( but vocal) far left
voices on the forum ( and there aren't actually all that many) dominate threads, all agreeing with one another. It's become a bit of a club for them - thankfully this is not the case for the country in general."

It appears, though, that it's all right for you, Anya, Nigglynellie, and POGS to agree with one another and make comments about the plight of the so-called "quiet moderates" being scared off by "the club".

My own view is that the description "far" right or left should probably be reserved, as Gracesgran suggested, to those who do not recognise or wish to operate under an established political system and who will use any means to get what they want.

Referring to Labour and how the far left should be distinguished, POGS said:

"If it walks like an animal, smells like a animal, it's an animal scenario" .

She goes on to sneer at the "sainted Guardian" and says that she believes some people on here receive e-mails from Momentum. Somebody has on several occasions made mention of Momentum so she is hardly being secretive - why should she be. Given the alacrity with which one or two posters on here jump to the defence of the Conservative Party on every issue, it could equally well be suspected that some have more allegiance to the Conservative Party than they care to reveal.

When I asked Anya what "socialist principles" she held and how those principles were not being met by the current Labour Party, she chose not to answer that question but go on the attack by describing my post as "aggressive".

By contrast, the so-called "club" put forward their views and ideas about the Labour Party's historical and current position and performance and what they feel its priorities should be:

Tricia F says "there is a need for an effective opposition, with a caring attitude towards those who are losing out. The task is to identify the "new poor" and try to correct the imblance". daphne says "The Labour Party has always been a coalition of people with different views. Many of the earliest MPs came from non-conformist religious backgrounds, others were Fabians, others Social Democrats and very few Marxists". Gracesgran says she believes left wing politics are summed up as "Social equality and egalitarianism, often in opposition to hierarchy and inequality". Daphne described her Conservative family background, her own original support of the Lib Dems and the experiences (which she was then told she had "over egged") that led her to finally vote Labour.

I did not see anything in those comments that would frighten off so-called moderates and prevent them from expressing their views.

Maybe not in those comments, but perhaps in your own comments Eloethan as the above post by you shows. Rather aggressive in tone I would say.That is exactly the sort of post that scares people off.Then what happens is other like minded posters ( to you) rush to your defense.....that's what I mean by club!
Anya is a Labour voter, niggly may or may not be Conservative( don't assume anything though, we don't know each other on here) and I have been a Lib Dem voter up to now, so that hardly makes US a club.
Fine, you and others are Socialists, but that does not make you Queens of the political threads, allow other voices to join in with their thoughts..... If they dare eh?

a proper democratic change to proportional representation
That system would mean that UKIP would have a larger number of MPs (1 at present) and the SNP would have far fewer.
(which could be the price to pay for not having such a disproportionate number of SNP at Westminster.)
However, there may have been another coalition - and with whom?

indy100.independent.co.uk/article/heres-how-the-election-results-would-look-under-a-proportional-voting-system--gJenQmaW2gW

Eloethan,

I think you should take up knitting and drinking Earl Grey out of china cups - hopefully nobody would find that aggressive! :-o

Ooh, I don't know, a jab with a knitting needle could be quite painful

Not surprised, varian, it's just not something I've picked up, possibly because I don't feel the need to give people labels. I'd rather just listen to what they have to say and consider that on its merits. Or otherwise, obviously.

A question. A serious one.

Can one be left-wing without being a socialist? Such as, say, somethin that might be described as a free-thinking liberal (small el).

'Left wing' is just a label and a fairly nonsensical one. 'Socialist' is also a label, but one with a more clearly defined meaning. Socialism isn't the same as Communism. In MY opinion (and it is only my opinion) socialism is about caring about a whole society. People can be socially liberal (small 'l') but not buy into economic liberalism, which is about lack of regulation. The original Liberals (Whigs) made their name with free trade (Google the Corn Laws).

I could go on (but for once I won't), so IMHO the answer is 'yes'. People can have various opinions on all sorts of measures, which is why I keep asking what people actually mean by 'left wing'.

PS. I also don't think 'right wing' is an appropriate label for UKIP, because (apart from its anti-immigration agenda), UKIP is anti-state.

Jalima, you obviously don't attend the same knitting circles I do! :-o

The tricoteuses sitting at the guillotine knitted as the aristos were beheaded. Not sure about the Earl Grey though. I think Madame Defarge had recourse to something stronger.

OMG! I'm going to give up knitting. It's obviously a subversive activity. How about crochet?

Seriously, I really don't see how Eloethan's posts have been aggressive.

Thank you, daphnedill, that's interesting. I hadn't thought about the whole society thing... well, maybe I had but I need to do some more of that. I suppose I've always thought of socialism as defined by Labour's Clause Four. Thing is, even that changes! And some people define socialism as much closer to Marxism and teetering over into Soviet or Chinese style communism.

Too much deep thinking and past my bedtime [yawn emoji]. At least I probably won't dream I have a guinea pig in each hand tonight!!

Sneering at the sainted Guardian? Is that a hanging offence?

Now't wrong with Earl Grey tea, in china cups or mugs.

I am a socialist, I am not a communist . I am a socialist because the principles of socialism is closest to my Christian Faith - I will repeat - my Christian Faith not Christian faith.

Eleothans post was not aggressive and I agree there is a 'club' , they nit pick most posts by those who may be labour supports or like me, are labour supporters

Yes,there is a club ab and you have a starring role in it.

There will be no moderate Labour supporters coming on this thread, as predicted earlier.

My starting point in politics is that the UK is the fifth (or sixth, depending which table you look at) richest nation in the world. We damn well should be able to afford a safety net which means that people can afford a roof over their head, food in their belly, be able to pay their bills, have a decent health care system and know that their children will have the opportunity for an education which enables them to fulfill their potential. Unfortunately, we don't.

I'm not anti-capitalist, because I think that there are some individuals who take extraordinary risks and I think they should be rewarded for them. I also think that good managers should be rewarded for their efforts. However, I also believe that the kind of salaries some people are now demanding are ridiculous and disproportionate. We have also arrived at a situation where the vast majority of people can never earn the kind of wealth which some people inherit without making any effort. It is also possible to become extremely wealthy by investing on various markets and asset stripping - against without actually producing anything or making anybody else wealthy. They care about themselves - and only themselves.

I am not a Communist, but I do believe that I live in a society. There is plenty of evidence to show that people who consider everybody within their society are happier and wealthier than those who only look after their own interests.

rosesarered,

Have you thought about going to bed?