Is it too late for a U turn on Brexit or at least watering it down?

I can't remember exactly Smileless. It was around 2003/4 - before the fees went up.

If we lived nearer each other we could have a history group meet up and discuss these things - or we could learn more. I did English and European history from 1832-1914 for my O level history - a very interesting period . Obviously you did it all in far greater detail Maizie.

Excellent post, Maizie, as is this by Angela Rayner.

This is why people should vote Labour.

inews.co.uk/opinion/comment/angela-rayner-vote-labour-change-lives/

Re read your condescending post of yesterday 15.17, my point was this forum is just an online forum for grannies not a Mensa debating society.

I am not sure what you find condescending Ninny. Could you explain so I can understand?

I wish I could have written that Maizie. Your history degree has served you well and you put so much in perspective. Brilliant, true and sad.

When did you do your first years' study with the OU daphnedill?

niinny is being a 'granny' and a member of Mensa mutually exclusive?

!

Excellent post Maizie.

I can see that coffee this morning worked magic.

I did the first year of an OU history degree, but sadly couldn't afford to continue. Nineteenth century social history was one of my interests.

Maizie that is an excellent summing up. Exactly how I feel too

<round of applause but there isn't a smiley here for that>

It certainly was. It really hurts to see what our society has become since the promise of the post war consensus.

maizie that was said from the heart

Great post, Maizie!

Nevertheless, unless you happen to be in the top half of the pecking order, you're shooting yourself in the foot if you vote for a Conservative Party which certainly looks down on you.

It makes me so sad when people reject Labour on the strength of a couple of ill judged remarks when the whole history of the Labour party shows that they have always fought to improve the lives of 'ordinary' people (yes, even Tory-Lite New Labour did some good things, like putting money into Education and the NHS to improve everyone's life chances)

Despising the 'liberal elite' makes me particularly sad. Why do people think that that 'elite', whose lives are comfortable and who need not concern themselves with with how the poorer people in society live, pour their energy into trying to make life better for everyone, not just the privileged few? Could it be that they actually do care that everyone should have the benefit of education, good health care, secure jobs and freedom from poverty? That everyone should have a fair share of the 'goods' of society? They don't have to; they're sitting pretty.

I have always been interested in History; I studied it at Uni as a mature student (an option increasingly unavailable now to many people). What particularly interests me is social history and the attitudes and thinking of the 'elite' (i.e the upper and middle classes) in respect of the working classes. Two things strike me.

One is the prevailing attitude of the well off towards the 'poor'. They genuinely believed that they were superior to those in worse circumstances than themselves; that the lower classes should give them total respect just because they were, by accident of birth alone, higher than them in the social order. In general they fought hard against improving the lot of the lower classes for fear that they would get above themselves and start to demand a share in the good things that the higher classes took to be their inalienable right. All along they were motivated by fear of revolution, of what they characterised as 'the mob'. Reading their thoughts expressed in reports of parliamentary debates, their letters and their literature is horrifying. They didn't so much despise their fellow human beings as consider them to be another species put on the earth to service their needs. That masses of the lower classes lived in poverty in squalid dwellings and died of starvation and sheer hard work (read some parliamentary enquiries into the conditions of factory workers; horrific) was really none of their concern.

Secondly, there were some among the 'elite' who did care about the condition of the lower classes. They fought to introduce legislation to improve their lot; the Factory Acts, universal education, improvements to sanitary infrastructure; they were massive philanthropists, using their wealth and influence to set up charities, schools, hospitals etc. We have a lot to thank the 'liberal elites' of the 19th century for.

But improved education and the work of radical thinkers such as, yes, Marx, provided the impetus for the founding of the Labour party, in which the increasingly well educated workers and the caring 'liberal elites' fought to improve the lives of everyone and to give the lower classes a share in the wealth which they helped to create through their labour.

Old habits of deference and acceptance of their being 'inferior' die very hard though. We still see it today and the wealthy elites work very hard at maintaining those habits.
Labour may have had its faults, the Unions may have gone over the top but it is to them that we owe much of the benefits we take for granted in today's society. Work related benefits such as shorter hours, holidays, health and safety legislation, minimum wages, indeed, decent wages. It was Labour who founded the Welfare state and NHS which we cherish; Labour who founded the Open University which gave so many people who missed out in their early education the opportunity to better themselves through improved qualifications.

And the Tories fought them every step of the way. They hated nationalisation because it deprived them of the opportunity to accumulate more wealth. They hated the Unions because they prevented them from exploiting their workers to get every ounce of work they possibly could out of them for minimum pay and punishing hours of work.

I am happy to admit that in the post war period the Tories appeared to agree with the achievements of the post war Labour government but the consensus was short lived. With Thatcher it rapidly broke down.

We all benefited hugely from Labour achievements, free health care, free education, cheap housing, yet somehow our generation seems to have been conned into thinking that we didn't deserve it after all. We've reverted to the age old rhetoric of the 'deserving' and 'undeserving' poor. We've become deferential again, being grateful for the crumbs from the rich man's table and believing that they will look after us really, despite hundreds of years of evidence that they won't.

Contrary to the received wisdom that people become more right wing as they get older I have found myself leaning further and further towards the Left. I'm living in the past, too. I want the consensus achieved in the 50's and 60's, that all citizens have value and the state should have a care for the welfare of all its citizens. It should protect the weak and ensure that all those who work are fairly treated and rewarded for the contribution they make to society.

I do not understand how anyone except the rich and self interested can vote for the Tory party which exists only to serve the interests of the rich and which has rejected the values our parent's generation promoted.

It was very moving Tegan - it's not often you see a paediatrician in tears.

Oh yes it was excellent I didn't realise it was Loach.

The Ken Loach one was about the NHS, with several doctors, nurses, consultants saying how scared they were for the future of the NHS. I've only just seen it; it was very moving.

I don't suppose either Brown or Thornberry is poor. Should they, by default, support the interest of their own class?

Both would probably still despise bigots.

So why are you bothered how underdogs think ninny?

tegan i havent seen the Ken Loach thing. I thought the NHS one was outstanding.

Polly Toynbee wrote that May told a nurse in the most brutal way that there is no magic money tree.
She refused to admit that the NHS is in deep crises.
This morning we learn that 12,000 childrens operstions were cancelled last year and are on course to be even higher. So that was 12,000 children suffering because of the Tories being hellbent on riding the state of the NHS. Who cares about children?

There have always been working class bigots, just as there are bigots of any class.

That's why there's conflict between traditional, stereotypical Labour supporters and those who are more open-minded and liberal. If you look at the history of the Labour Party, it has ever been thus.

That's why UKIP was/is so appealing to working class voters.

Nevertheless, unless you happen to be in the top half of the pecking order, you're shooting yourself in the foot if you vote for a Conservative Party which certainly looks down on you.

WW if as you say the Tories are responsible for the 'poisoned chalice', surely it is obvious we need someone more principled and competent to get us out of it.

ninny
Oh how true. but in reality look down on them. This attitude shouts out to me from some posters on here and they can't see it, but I'm sure it's not only you and I who see it.

I'm exactly the same, whitewave. I do want them to have to sort out this incredible mess they've got us in [if that's possible].On the other hand, I've just watched Ken Loach's PPB for the Labour Party and the thought of 5 more years of austerity cuts fills me with dread. I keep wondering how much money the referendum, election etc has actually cost not to mention the parliamentary time it has/will take up given we have so many other problems to deal with.

No I'm not an underdog and I also don't purport to champion them either.